run-sequence-android-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Double Tap

android_double_tap

Double-tap an Android screen at specified x,y pixel coordinates to trigger gestures or UI actions, optionally targeting a connected device.

Instructions

Double-tap the screen at x,y pixel coordinates.

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": {
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "android_double_tap"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`x`	Yes	X coordinate in pixels
`y`	Yes	Y coordinate in pixels
`device`	No	Device id (serial or host:port). Optional -- when omitted, uses ANDROID_MCP_DEVICE env or auto-selects the connected device (physical devices preferred over emulators).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only states the basic action. It does not mention whether there is any delay between taps, whether the gesture triggers app-specific behavior, or any side effects.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is immediately understandable.

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 tool with good schema coverage, the description is adequate but lacks context about coordinate system origin (default top-left) and device selection fallback. It does not cover all aspects an agent might need.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for x, y, and device. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('double-tap') and the target ('screen at x,y pixel coordinates'). It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like android_tap (single tap), android_long_press, and android_drag.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is no mention that this should be used for double-tap gestures instead of single taps or long presses.

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