Skip to main content
Glama
HuntsDesk

Google Workspace MCP VE

by HuntsDesk
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Hybrid

inspect_doc_structure

Inspect a Google Doc's structure to find safe insertion indices for tables, locate existing tables, and understand layout. Essential before any modification to avoid errors.

Instructions

Essential tool for finding safe insertion points and understanding document structure.

USE THIS FOR:

  • Finding the correct index for table insertion

  • Understanding document layout before making changes

  • Locating existing tables and their positions

  • Getting document statistics and complexity info

  • Inspecting structure of specific tabs

CRITICAL FOR TABLE OPERATIONS: ALWAYS call this BEFORE creating tables to get a safe insertion index.

WHAT THE OUTPUT SHOWS:

  • total_elements: Number of document elements

  • total_length: Maximum safe index for insertion

  • tables: Number of existing tables

  • table_details: Position and dimensions of each table

  • headers / footers: Real segment IDs and previews for header/footer editing

  • tabs: List of available tabs in the document (if no tab_id specified)

WORKFLOW FOR TABLE INSERTION: Step 1: Call this function Step 2: Note the "total_length" value Step 3: Use an index < total_length for table insertion Step 4: Create your table

FORMATTING WORKFLOW: After inserting all text via batch_update_doc with end_of_segment=true, call this tool with detailed=true to get exact start_index and end_index for every paragraph. Use those indices directly in format_text and update_paragraph_style operations in a second batch_update_doc call.

HEADER/FOOTER WORKFLOW: For ordinary header/footer text, use update_doc_headers_footers. If you need low-level segment editing, call this tool first and use the real segment_id values returned under headers/footers. Do not invent IDs.

The detailed output includes elements[].start_index and elements[].end_index with text_preview for each paragraph, making it easy to identify which ranges to format.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_google_emailYesUser's Google email address
document_idYesID of the document to inspect
detailedNoWhether to return detailed structure information
tab_idNoOptional ID of the tab to inspect. If not provided, inspects main document.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the tool's read-only nature and details of its output fields (e.g., total_length, tables, headers). It also warns against inventing segment IDs, adding important behavioral context beyond what annotations would cover.

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 sections, bullet points, and a workflow format, making it easy to scan. However, it is somewhat verbose and could be trimmed (e.g., repeated emphasis on calling before table creation).

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description thoroughly covers all aspects: purpose, usage, output fields, and workflows. It leaves no obvious gaps for an agent to understand how to use the tool effectively.

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?

While schema coverage is 100% and parameters are described clearly, the description adds value by explaining when to use the `detailed` parameter (e.g., in formatting workflow) and how `tab_id` affects output. This goes beyond the schema definitions.

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 is for 'finding safe insertion points and understanding document structure' and lists specific use cases like finding table insertion indices and locating existing tables. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on structure inspection for table operations.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: before table creation, during formatting workflows, and for header/footer editing. It contrasts with `update_doc_headers_footers` for normal header/footer usage and includes step-by-step workflows for table insertion and formatting.

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/HuntsDesk/ve-gws'

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