Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
grp-docx-mcp

grp-docx-mcp

by Arvindh95Censof
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

csv_to_table

Insert a table into a Word document from CSV data. Choose paragraph location and whether to treat first row as header.

Instructions

Insert a table from CSV text.

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": {
      "para_id": "<para_id>",
      "csv_text": "<csv_text>"
    },
    "name": "csv_to_table"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
para_idYes
csv_textYes
header_rowNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.4

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the table is inserted at the cursor, appended, or replaces existing content. No mention of error conditions or limitations.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant words. Perfectly concise for a simple operation.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 3 parameters and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the role of 'para_id' or the output format (though an output schema exists). The tool's behavior and return value are not described, leaving significant gaps.

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%, and the description adds no explanation for parameters. 'para_id', 'csv_text', and 'header_row' are not elaborated. The schema titles provide minimal hints but the description fails to compensate for the lack of documentation.

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 'Insert a table from CSV text' clearly specifies the action (insert) and the resource (table from CSV). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_table' (creates empty table) and 'table_to_csv' (reverse operation).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_table' or 'copy_table'. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description is too brief to aid in decision-making.

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