Capture the screen and overlay a coordinate grid.
step: grid spacing (default 0.1, use 0.05 for finer grid on small UI elements).
Returns a JPEG image with grid drawn on top.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| step | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Given no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the output (JPEG with grid) but does not mention side effects, permission requirements, or limitations (e.g., full-screen capture). Adequate but not detailed.
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?
Three sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and all content is relevant. Efficient and clear.
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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, parameter semantics, and return format. Could mention that it captures the full screen, but overall sufficient.
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?
Adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining step as grid spacing and suggesting usage (0.05 for finer grid on small UI elements). This compensates for the schema's minimal description (0% coverage).
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?
Clearly states the tool captures the screen and overlays a coordinate grid, which is a specific verb+resource combination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like take_screenshot (no grid) and take_screenshot_with_crosshair (crosshair overlay).
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?
Provides guidance on the step parameter (default and finer grid usage) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Implies use for coordinate-based actions but lacks explicit context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: clicks, screenshots (raw, corrected, calibration aids), keyboard input, mouse movement, scrolling, and corner calibration. There is no ambiguity between tools.
Tool names mix conventions: some are single verbs (click, scroll, key), some are verb_noun (move_mouse, set_corners, type_text), and some are longer phrases (take_screenshot_with_crosshair). Although readable, the inconsistency is notable.
With 12 tools, the server covers all essential interactions for camera-based screen control without being bloated or sparse. Each tool has a clear role.
The tool set covers clicking, typing, key combinations, mouse movement, scrolling, and multiple screenshot modes including calibration aids. Missing drag/swipe functionality is a minor gap.