Executes a touch swipe gesture on a mobile device by specifying start and end coordinates, enabling gesture simulation in Appium tests.
[approval required][device mutation][risk:dangerous] Perform a touch swipe by coordinates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| endX | Yes | ||
| endY | Yes | ||
| startX | Yes | ||
| startY | Yes | ||
| serverUrl | No | ||
| sessionId | Yes | ||
| durationMs | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0-alpha.14Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden. It includes explicit tags '[approval required][device mutation][risk:dangerous]', which disclose safety and mutation traits. However, it does not explain side effects like screen state changes, reversibility, or session requirements, so it only partially covers behavioral transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise and front-loaded with risk tags, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently sized. It contains no wasted words but lacks critical content, so it does not earn a higher score.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 7 parameters, zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. An agent would not know the coordinate system, required session setup, optional duration semantics, or expected effect, making correct invocation highly uncertain.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description fails to explain any of the 7 parameters. It merely says 'by coordinates', leaving startX/startY/endX/endY units and coordinate space unspecified, and durationMs, serverUrl, and sessionId entirely unexplained. The description adds almost no meaning beyond the bare schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('swipe') and resource ('touch by coordinates'), clearly identifying the action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like appium.tap_coordinates, so it misses the explicit sibling contrast that would make it a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tap_coordinates or other gestures. The sole sentence implies usage ('swipe') but gives no context on prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.