Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
android-mcp

android-mcp

by ibrahimali111
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

android_swipe

Simulate a swipe or drag gesture on a device screen by specifying start and end coordinates, with an optional duration in milliseconds to automate touch interactions over ADB.

Instructions

Perform a swipe or drag gesture from (x1, y1) to (x2, y2).

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": {
      "x1": "<x1>",
      "y1": "<y1>",
      "x2": "<x2>",
      "y2": "<y2>"
    },
    "name": "android_swipe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
x1YesStarting X coordinate
x2YesEnding X coordinate
y1YesStarting Y coordinate
y2YesEnding Y coordinate
duration_msNoSwipe duration in milliseconds (default 300)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it only restates the gesture. It does not say whether the call blocks until the gesture completes, whether coordinates are device pixels or density-independent units, or whether the gesture can be interrupted.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler that states the action and the two endpoints immediately. Nothing is padded or redundant.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple 5-parameter gesture tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but leaves notable gaps: coordinate space, blocking behavior, and how duration_ms affects gesture speed/fling are all unaddressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the four coordinates and duration_ms are already documented in the schema; the description merely mirrors the (x1, y1) to (x2, y2) mapping. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('swipe or drag') and resource (a gesture between two coordinate pairs), plus the exact direction of the motion. It naturally distinguishes itself from android_tap, but it never explicitly names or contrasts with that sibling, so it lands just below the top band.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use a swipe versus a tap, drag, or shell input command, and no prerequisites or constraints. An agent must infer the use case entirely from the phrase 'swipe or drag'.

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