Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Onda MCP

Onda MCP

by mindfullabai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

onda_window_list

List all Onda main windows to check window ID, focus state, title, and workspace assignments before adding a new terminal or workspace.

Instructions

List all Onda main windows. Returns { windows: [{ windowId, isFocused, title, workspaceIds[], activeWorkspaceId, uiMode }] }. Use this before placing a new workspace/terminal to know what windows exist and which workspace lives in which window.

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": "onda_window_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.2

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the return format but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or mention any error conditions. For a list tool, 'List' implies read-only, but it could still be more explicit.

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 two sentences: the first is a clear, front-loaded purpose statement, and the second adds a concrete usage scenario and return structure. No filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a parameterless list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is quite complete: it states the purpose, return format, and a use case. It doesn't cover edge cases like empty windows or session prerequisites, but those are not critical for this simple operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides no constraints to clarify. The description adds value by documenting the output structure, which is the primary semantic content. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets it.

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 opens with 'List all Onda main windows,' which is a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like onda_workspace_list. It also provides a return shape, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this before placing a new workspace/terminal' to understand window/workspace mapping. It lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the scenario is clearly stated, which is sufficient guidance for this simple list tool.

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