I'm afraid that sometimes, people try to apply the close reasons a bit too literally. If you simply tick through all those reasons to determine whether a question is a good question, it's going to be extremely hard to find any questions on Stack Overflow that should remain open. There is always more code that you could show, more evidence of effort, more details you could add, ways you could be more specific, some degree of subjectivity involved, etc. etc.
I think it works better to read the question, evaluate it on its own merits, and decide whether or not it's a good question. If you decide that the question is poor and needs to be closed, then you open the close box and decide which one of the given reasons is the most appropriate. If none of them fit, you choose the "other" option and write a custom reason.
We don't want to be closing questions in spite of themselves. That is self-defeating for a Q&A site.
There is nothing wrong with this question. It is perfectly valid, well-asked, on-topic, and most importantly, answerable (evidenced, if nothing else, by the fact it has received an accepted answer with score >10).
Obviously what bothered you was this sentence:
Does anyone know a good tool to do what I want?
But we don't close questions because of keywords that they contain. If so, we could just write a script that did this and get the close queue that gnat keeps complaining about down to size in short order. Such an approach, however, is fundamentally broken because it ignores context and understanding—the very reason that we require voting to close a question.
Don't get caught up on key words and phrases. Consider how that question would look if it were rewritten without that sentence, or with a slightly-modified phrasing.
Maybe something like:
How can I do this?
Look OK to you? Yup, me too. ∴ Leave Open