run-sequence-android-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Drag And Drop

android_drag

Drag from one point to another on an Android device with a slow swipe that triggers drag behavior, letting you move items or interact with draggable UI elements.

Instructions

Drag from one point and drop at another (uses a slow swipe that triggers drag behavior).

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": {
      "fromX": "<fromX>",
      "fromY": "<fromY>",
      "toX": "<toX>",
      "toY": "<toY>"
    },
    "name": "android_drag"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`toX`	Yes	End X coordinate
`toY`	Yes	End Y coordinate
`fromX`	Yes	Start X coordinate
`fromY`	Yes	Start Y coordinate
`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).
`duration`	No	Drag duration in milliseconds. Defaults to 1500.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the burden. It adds context that the tool performs a slow swipe to trigger drag behavior and mentions a default duration. However, it does not disclose safety, side effects, or whether it is destructive.

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, clear sentence with no redundant or unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the essential action and can be quickly understood.

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 tool with 6 parameters (4 required) and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It explains the core gesture but does not cover potential side effects, return values, or prerequisites.

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 all parameters described in the input schema. The description does not add additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 explicitly states the verb 'drag' and the resource 'from one point and drop at another', clearly indicating the specific UI gesture. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'android_swipe' by noting it uses a slow swipe that triggers drag behavior.

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?

The description implies usage for drag-and-drop actions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like android_swipe or android_long_press. No specific contextual guidance or prerequisites are provided.

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