OmniCommanderMCP

by kaannsaydamm

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

launch_application

Launch a desktop application on Windows, macOS, or Linux, optionally passing arguments to customize its behavior.

Instructions

Launch an application cross-platform.

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": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "launch_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`args`	No
`target`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'cross-platform' but fails to disclose behavior such as error handling, blocking behavior, or what happens if the application is not found.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (one sentence) but under-specified. It is not concise in a helpful way; important details are missing.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the lack of output schema, 2 parameters with zero documentation, and numerous sibling tools, the description is wholly inadequate. The agent cannot determine how to properly invoke the tool or interpret results.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for 'target' (e.g., path vs. name) or 'args' (e.g., how they are passed). The agent gets no usable information beyond the schema structure.

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 'Launch an application cross-platform' clearly states the verb (launch) and resource (application). It is specific enough to distinguish from siblings like 'close_application', but does not explicitly differentiate from 'spawn_process' or 'run_command'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run_command' or 'spawn_process'. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.