DOCX MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

docx.styles_get

Retrieve all styles defined in a DOCX document by providing its document ID. Use this to inspect formatting styles for further manipulation.

Instructions

Get document styles

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": {
      "docId": "<docId>"
    },
    "name": "docx.styles_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`docId`	Yes	Document ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 22, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior, but it only says 'Get document styles.' It implies a read-only operation but does not disclose what is returned, whether defaults are included, side effects, or error behavior.

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 a short, front-loaded single sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of behavioral and usage detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Although the tool has only one parameter, it has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what the caller receives. It does not state the return shape or the scope of 'styles,' leaving an agent to guess at the expected result.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema already fully documents docId with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat it. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides, which meets the baseline for fully covered parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('document styles'), and the name pairs naturally with docx.styles_set. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from other getters or say what 'styles' means in this context.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like docx.styles_set or docx.metadata_get. The intended use is only implied by the name and definition, with no explicit selection criteria or exclusions.

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