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

grp-docx-mcp

by Arvindh95Censof
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

insert_if_field

Insert a conditional IF field at the end of a Word paragraph to display different text based on whether a condition is true or false.

Instructions

Insert a Word IF conditional field at the end of a paragraph.

Args: para_id: w14:paraId of the target paragraph. condition: The condition expression (e.g. "x > 0"). true_text: Text to display when condition is true. false_text: Text to display when condition is false.

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>",
      "condition": "<condition>",
      "true_text": "<true_text>",
      "false_text": "<false_text>"
    },
    "name": "insert_if_field"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
para_idYes
conditionYes
true_textYes
false_textYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.4

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only covers the basic action and parameters; it does not disclose error handling, document state requirements, or whether the field is inserted as a code or evaluated.

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 concise, with a clear first line stating the purpose and a structured list of arguments; no redundant or superfluous content.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks important contextual details such as the format of the condition expression, behavior on invalid para_id, and how the field will be displayed in the document.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains each parameter, including the format for para_id (w14:paraId) and the roles of condition, true_text, and false_text, adding complete semantic meaning.

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 clearly states the tool inserts a Word IF conditional field at the end of a paragraph, using specific verbs and resources that distinguish it from sibling field insertion tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_field or insert_merge_field; the context is implied (for IF fields) but lacks explicit guidance or exclusions.

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