Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Copilot Desktop MCP

Copilot Desktop MCP

by avianhermana
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

List Open Windows

list_open_windows
Read-only

Lists visible desktop application windows with their titles, process IDs, and bounds so you can identify and target open windows.

Instructions

List visible application windows currently open on desktop with their titles, PIDs, and bounds.

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": "list_open_windows"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_resultsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe, non-mutating profile. The description adds a useful behavioral filter — only visible windows are returned — but says nothing about truncation, ordering, or what happens when the desktop has more windows than the result limit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. The resource and its scope come first, followed by the returned fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so enumerating titles, PIDs, and bounds is largely redundant, while the one parameter that needs explanation is ignored. For a simple read-only listing tool this is adequate but leaves a real gap around result limiting.

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?

There is one parameter, max_results, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. With a single undocumented parameter, the description leaves the caller without guidance on the limit or its default behavior.

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 and resource ("List visible application windows") and adds the scope qualifier "currently open on desktop." It implicitly contrasts with the singular sibling get_active_window by emphasizing plural enumeration, though it does not name that sibling.

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?

Usage is implied by the listing nature of the tool, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to alternatives such as get_active_window for the focused window. An agent must infer the choice from the name and purpose statement.

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