Local MCP

Word Create

word_create

Destructive

Creates a new Word (.docx) document at path with the given text content (and an optional title rendered as the heading). The path must be somewhere LMCP can write; Desktop/Documents/Downloads may need a one-time Files-and-Folders grant (System Settings → Privacy & Security → Files and Folders). Returns {created, path}. For a OneDrive or Google Drive path use onedrive_write_file / gdrive_write_file; to append to an existing doc use word_append, to read one word_read.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Output path for the .docx file
`title`	No	Document title (optional)
`confirm`	No	Ignored; kept for older clients.
`content`	Yes	Document text content
`overwrite`	No	Required (with confirm) to REPLACE a file that already exists at path. Without it an existing file is never touched.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes	Path of the created .docx file
`created`	Yes	True when the document was created

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
```
Previous value: -"Must be true to create"New value: +"Ignored; kept for older clients."
```

Changed1 schema field changedOct 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / overwrite

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required (with confirm) to REPLACE a file that already exists at path. Without it an existing file is never touched.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedJun 30, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds critical behavioral traits not found in annotations or schema, such as requiring a writable LMCP path, stating the return structure ({created, path}), and detailing the need for specific system-level permissions for local folders.

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 tool utilizes a dense but highly effective structure. Every sentence provides a critical piece of operational context, scoping, or usage guidance, resulting in zero waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the high schema coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description is highly complete. It covers prerequisite setup, operational constraints, functional alternatives, and core behavior.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant value by clarifying complex logic, specifically explaining that the 'overwrite' parameter determines if an existing file is touched or ignored.

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 explicitly states the function: 'Creates a new Word (.docx) document'. It clearly identifies the resource and its primary action, making it immediately distinguishable from other file manipulation tools like word_read or word_append.

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?

It provides comprehensive routing logic: it guides users to cloud-specific handlers (onedrive_write_file) or functional alternatives for different use cases like appending (word_append) or reading (word_read).

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

All Local MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.