Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
WpfVisualTreeMcp

WpfVisualTreeMcp

by faze79
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

wpf_get_visual_tree

Retrieve and navigate the visual tree of a WPF application. Start from a specific element and control depth to inspect UI hierarchy.

Instructions

Get the visual tree hierarchy. Use root_handle to start from a specific element (from wpf_find_elements). Use max_depth to control depth (1-100, default 25). For deep UIs like AvalonDock, increase max_depth or use root_handle to zoom into a subtree.

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": "wpf_get_visual_tree"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_depthNo
root_handleNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authorization needs, or side effects. Since it's a 'get' operation, it likely does not modify state, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no redundant words, and the purpose is front-loaded. Each sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema is present, and the description does not explain the return format. Behavioral details are missing, but for a simple hierarchical retrieval, the description is minimally viable.

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?

The description adds meaning to both parameters beyond the schema: root_handle is linked to wpf_find_elements, and max_depth has a suggested range (1-100) with a default of 25. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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 clearly states 'Get the visual tree hierarchy' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by referencing 'root_handle to start from a specific element (from wpf_find_elements)', indicating its unique purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on using root_handle and max_depth parameters, including a tip for deep UIs like AvalonDock. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for typical usage.

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