KitchenSink4Word

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Insert List

insert_list

Insert bulleted or numbered lists into Word documents, with nested levels and per-level formats. Control numbering continuation or restart, choose insertion point, and rely on automatic backups.

Instructions

Insert a bulleted or numbered list with real bullet/number glyphs (numbering.xml as needed). items: strings or {text, level} dicts (level 0-8 nests); kind: bullet | number. A call makes its own list, so numbering restarts at 1; continue_from (a num_id from list_elements) carries on an existing one and start_at restarts the new one at N. levels sets per-level formats: [{level, format, text, start, suffix, align, indent_pt, hanging_pt, font}], format one of decimal | lowerLetter | upperLetter | lowerRoman | upperRoman | bullet | none, text a label like '%1.%2.'. location picks the insertion point (omit for document end). Auto-backup to .ks4w-backups; atomic validated save. Refuses documents open in Word.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`kind`	No	bullet
`items`	Yes
`backup`	No
`levels`	No
`location`	No
`start_at`	No
`file_path`	Yes
`continue_from`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.3Sep 8, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / continue_from

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

addedInput schema / properties / levels

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

addedInput schema / properties / start_at

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

Addedv2.0.0Sep 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: each call creates its own list and restarts numbering, it auto-creates .ks4w-backups, saves are atomic and validated, and it refuses documents open in Word. This gives the agent what it needs to anticipate side effects and failure conditions.

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?

Although dense, every sentence earns its place: main action first, then parameter semantics, then behavioral caveats. No filler or repetition; the compact notation packs a lot of necessary information.

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 tool with 8 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is nearly complete. It explains all nontrivial parameters and behaviors, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The only small gaps are the exact shape of the location object and whether the backup parameter disables the auto-backup behavior.

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?

With zero schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden and succeeds. It explains the items shape ('strings or {text, level} dicts'), the kind enum, the levels array format with all per-level fields and allowed format values, and the continue_from/start_at/location semantics. Only file_path and backup rely on name/default inference, which is acceptable.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Insert a bulleted or numbered list with real bullet/number glyphs.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling insertion tools like insert_paragraphs or create_table, and the supporting detail about numbering.xml reinforces the specific function.

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 gives clear usage context: it tells the agent when to use the tool (inserting bulleted/numbered lists), how to continue existing numbering via continue_from from list_elements, and how to set start_at and location. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is unambiguous.

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