Skip to main content
Glama

insert_text

Insert text into a specific paragraph, optionally marking it as a tracked change for reviewer acceptance.

Instructions

Insert text into a paragraph.

By default (tracked=True) the insertion is marked as a proposed addition that appears underlined in Word's Track Changes view. The human reviewer must accept it in Word before it becomes permanent. Pass tracked=False to write the text directly with no revision markup.

Args: para_id: paraId of the target paragraph. text: Text to insert. position: Where to insert — "start", "end", or a substring to insert after. author: Author name shown in Word's review pane (tracked=True only). context_before: Text immediately before the insertion point (for precise anchoring). context_after: Text immediately after the insertion point (for precise anchoring). ignore_case: If True, match context_before/context_after case-insensitively. tracked: True (default) = revision markup the human accepts/rejects in Word. False = text written directly, no markup. document_handle: Optional handle for concurrent session isolation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
authorNoClaude
para_idYes
trackedNo
positionNoend
ignore_caseNo
context_afterNo
context_beforeNo
document_handleNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It describes the tracked behavior and parameter effects, but does not mention error handling (e.g., invalid para_id) or reversibility. Overall transparent, but misses some edge cases.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with an intro paragraph and a parameter list. It is somewhat lengthy due to the detailed parameter explanations, but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but is well-organized.

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?

Given the output schema exists, return values are covered elsewhere. The description covers main functionality and parameter details. It lacks information on error conditions or prerequisites (e.g., document must be open), but is otherwise complete for a text insertion tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides a detailed docstring for every parameter, including defaults and behavior (e.g., context_before/after for anchoring). This fully compensates for the missing 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?

The description clearly states 'Insert text into a paragraph', specifying the verb (insert) and resource (text into a paragraph). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_text and replace_text by focusing on insertion.

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?

The description explains tracked vs untracked usage, noting that tracked=True requires human acceptance. It does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives, but the context of tracked changes is helpful. Could be improved by contrasting with replace_text or delete_text.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Arvindh95Censof/grp-docx-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server