Skip to main content
Glama

Find Windows By Title

find_windows_by_title

Find open windows by matching a case-insensitive title substring, so you can identify and target the correct application window for debugging or desktop control.

Instructions

Find windows whose title contains the substring (case-insensitive).

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": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "find_windows_by_title"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 matching predicate. It says nothing about behavior on zero matches (empty list vs error), whether the search covers all desktops or minimized/hidden windows, or whether it is a pure read. The presence of an output schema covers the return shape but not these semantics.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the matching constraint appended. Nothing is padded and nothing needs reordering.

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 single-parameter read-only search with an output schema, the description covers the essentials of what is matched. It leaves open how results are scoped (all windows? current workspace?) and what happens when nothing matches, which matters for an agent deciding between this and list_windows.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it specifies that the value is matched as a case-insensitive substring rather than an exact or regex match. That meaning is entirely absent from the bare {"title": string} schema and is the key detail for calling it correctly.

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 uses a specific verb ("Find") and resource ("windows") and defines the match rule precisely, including case-insensitivity. It stops short of differentiating itself from the close siblings find_windows_by_process and list_windows, so the agent must infer which selector to use.

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 reach for this tool versus list_windows (enumerate all) or find_windows_by_process (select by process). The match semantics hint at a title-based search, but no alternative is named and no exclusion or precondition is given.

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