Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
phonedriver

phonedriver

by hridaya423
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

tap

Presses an @ref, visible text, or x,y point on Android/iOS screens; set long to hold the press for context menus and read the returned screen.

Instructions

Tap by @ref, text or x,y point (from a screenshot). long holds the press that many ms (context menus). The reply is the new screen: read it, and call tools one at a time (they share one screen).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "tap"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
longNo
targetYes@ref, `x,y` or text.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the disclosure burden and does meaningful work: it reveals the tool is stateful (all tools share one screen), that the return value is the resulting screen, and that serialized invocation is required. It omits failure behavior and whether a tap is considered safe/read-only.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the targeting modes, then the modifier parameter, then the return/coordination contract. No sentence is redundant and nothing is buried.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, and the description correctly steps in to say the reply is the new screen. Both parameters are accounted for. What's missing is error/not-found handling and a mention of how this relates to the press tool for long presses.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%, but the description compensates by explaining `long` as a press duration in milliseconds with the concrete use case of invoking context menus. `target` is left to the schema, which already documents its three accepted formats.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (tap) and enumerates the three accepted target forms (@ref, text, or x,y point), which an agent can act on directly. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling 'press' tool, which is a real ambiguity given that the `long` parameter here also performs a held press.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied rather than stated: tapping an element seen on a screen. The description does give a genuine operational rule (call tools one at a time, read the reply first), but it never says when to prefer tap over press, swipe, or type, nor what to do if the target is not found.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools