Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Restore Window

restore_window

Restore a maximized window to normal state using its title or window ID, enabling desktop control during application debugging or security assessments.

Instructions

Unmaximize/restore a window to normal state.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "restore_window"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo
window_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the resulting window state, which is the core effect. It omits edge behavior such as whether it is a no-op on an already-normal window, what happens when no window is specified, and any permission or focus 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with the action and end state front-loaded and zero filler. It is arguably too terse for the ambiguity in its parameters, but there is no wasted wording.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with two fully undocumented optional parameters and no annotations, the definition leaves the central question — how to target the window — unanswered. For a state-mutating tool that is a meaningful gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and both parameters are nullable with no descriptions, so the schema gives an agent nothing about the meaning of 'title' versus 'window_id'. The description adds no targeting semantics at all, not even precedence between the two optional parameters or what happens when both are null.

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?

States a specific verb pair ('Unmaximize/restore') and resource ('a window') plus the resulting state ('normal state'), which lets an agent distinguish it from maximize_window, minimize_window, and fullscreen_window in the sibling list. It does not explicitly name or contrast against those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'restore to normal state' implies the situation (a maximized window), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as maximize_window for the inverse operation. Usage must be inferred from the verb.

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