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

grp-docx-mcp

by Arvindh95Censof
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

set_page_size

Set page dimensions in millimetres for a Word document section by specifying width and height. Optionally target a specific section via paragraph ID.

Instructions

Set page size from millimetre values.

Args: width_mm: Page width in mm (e.g. 210 for A4, 215.9 for Letter). height_mm: Page height in mm (e.g. 297 for A4, 279.4 for Letter). para_id: paraId of paragraph with section break. None = body section.

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": {
      "width_mm": "<width_mm>",
      "height_mm": "<height_mm>"
    },
    "name": "set_page_size"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
para_idNo
width_mmYes
height_mmYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.4

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Describes what the tool does but does not mention behavioral traits like constraints on dimensions (min/max), units assumed (mm), or error handling. With no annotations, description carries burden; it's adequate but not thorough.

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?

Very concise: one-line purpose followed by structured Args section. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy. Well-organized and 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 simple setter tool with 3 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description is fairly complete. Lacks information on dimension constraints or error behavior, but overall adequate.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning: width_mm and height_mm with standard sizes, para_id with None meaning body section. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Set page size from millimetre values.' Specific examples (A4, Letter) and distinguishes from sibling tools like set_page_margins, set_page_orientation.

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?

Description provides parameter examples but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives. Usage is implied by the tool name and examples; no guidance on when to choose this over set_page_margins or set_page_orientation.

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