Skip to main content
Glama

type_text

Types text into a specified window after confirming focus; verifies characters were received correctly by reading back the widget, preventing layout-related key transposition errors.

Instructions

Type into a named window. Focus is confirmed first, nothing is typed if it cannot be confirmed, and the widget is read back afterwards to check the right characters arrived. Characters go to the compositor as keysyms, so the keyboard layout cannot transpose them -- the German-QWERTZ hazard that made ydotool type z for y does not apply to this path. ui_set_text is still better where it works: it hands text to the widget and needs no focus at all.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viaNoauto prefers compositor keysyms and falls back to ydotool.auto
lookNoWhat to show you afterwards. Default "auto": wait for the screen to stop changing, measure how much this action changed, and attach a picture of the affected window only if something did change -- so a click that hit nothing costs no tokens and says so. "window" always attaches it, "screen" uses the whole desktop (slower, 6x the tokens), "region" uses look_at, false skips all of it. Use false for the middle of a sequence you are going to check at the end anyway.auto
textYesLiteral text to type
targetYesWindow id from list_windows, or a wm_class / title fragment. The window is activated and focus is CONFIRMED before any key is sent; if focus does not land, nothing is typed.
look_atNoRectangle for look:"region", in screen pixels. Object form {x, y, width, height} or array form [x, y, width, height].
verify_appNoAT-SPI application name to read back for verification; auto-detected from the window if omitted
key_delay_msNo
settle_max_sNoHow long to wait for the screen to stop changing before looking. Raise it for an app that animates slowly; set it to 0 to capture immediately.
Install Server

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals that focus is confirmed before typing, nothing is typed if confirmation fails, the widget is read back for verification, and keysyms avoid keyboard-layout transposition. It stops short of explaining what happens if the read-back verification fails, but this is otherwise strong behavioral disclosure.

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 three sentences, each adding distinct value: the verification workflow, the keysym technical property, and the alternative tool. There is no filler, and the most important behavioral guarantee is front-loaded.

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 tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core workflow, a critical safety property, and the main alternative. The only notable gap is the absence of an explicit statement about what happens when post-type verification fails or what the tool returns.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 88%, with detailed descriptions for via, look, target, look_at, verify_app, and settle_max_s. The description itself adds no per-parameter semantics, only global context about keysym delivery and verification, so the baseline for high schema coverage applies.

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 'Type into a named window,' giving a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from ui_set_text by explaining that ui_set_text hands text directly to the widget and requires no focus, making the tool's unique scope clear.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly names ui_set_text as the preferred alternative when it works, giving the agent a clear routing condition. It also explains type_text's focus-confirmation guarantee, which helps the agent decide when this tool is appropriate.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tristanmuzzu/deskwright'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server