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

grp-docx-mcp

by Arvindh95Censof
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

update_chart_data

Replace data series in an existing Word chart using the chart ID, providing new series names and values.

Instructions

Replace data series in an existing chart by chart_id.

series: [{"name": str, "values": [float, ...]}]

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": {
      "chart_id": "<chart_id>",
      "series": "<series>"
    },
    "name": "update_chart_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seriesYes
chart_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.4

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey behavioral traits. 'Replace' implies a mutable operation. However, it does not detail side effects like overwriting all existing series or prerequisites, but it is sufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

Two sentences: one for purpose and one for parameter format. No unnecessary words, efficient and well-structured.

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?

Output schema exists, so return value is covered. The description is adequate for a simple update tool but could mention prerequisites or error handling. Still reasonably complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description provides the exact JSON structure for the series parameter (name and values fields), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's generic array of objects.

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?

Description clearly states the tool replaces data series in an existing chart identified by chart_id. The verb 'replace' and resource 'data series in an existing chart' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling insert chart tools (e.g., insert_bar_chart) which create new charts.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Implicitly indicates use when modifying an existing chart's data series. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but context signals show sibling insert chart tools, making it clear this is for updates.

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