Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Office Live MCP

Office Live MCP

by benjaminfrombe
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

add_connector

Draw straight or bezier connectors between shapes or points on a slide, automatically calculating OOXML bounding-box geometry and appending the connector in the chosen z-order.

Instructions

Draw a line or curved connector between two shapes or points, with all OOXML bounding-box math (off/ext/flips, bezier path) computed for you. For bezier curves the path leaves and arrives horizontally — no flip attributes are used, avoiding the custGeom double-mirror pitfall. The shape is appended on top of the slide.

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": {
      "slide": "<slide>",
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "add_connector"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesEndpoint: {shapeId} or {x, y}
fromYesEndpoint: {shapeId} or {x, y}
colorNoLine color as RRGGBB hex, e.g. "EF463C". Default EF463C.
curveNostraight (default) or bezier (horizontal tangents at both ends).
slideYesSlide number, 1-based
zOrderNo"top" (default) appends above all shapes; "bottom" inserts below all shapes.
alphaPctNoOpacity in percent (0-100). Omit for fully opaque.
weightPtNoLine width in points. Default 1.
beforeShapeIdNoInsert the connector directly below this shape ID (z-order). Overrides zOrder.
presentationIdNoTarget presentation ID. Optional when only one presentation is connected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.7.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose useful traits: the shape is appended on top of the slide, and bezier connectors emit no flip attributes to avoid double-mirroring. However, it never says what the call returns (presumably a new shape ID needed for later edits), whether endpoint shapeIds must already exist, or any failure conditions for a 10-parameter 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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the geometric guarantee, then the layering behavior. Every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to infer, and nothing is repeated from the schema or title.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter drawing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the geometry and stacking behavior well but leaves the return value and endpoint-resolution rules unstated. An agent knows how to call it but not what it gets back or how to reference the created connector afterward.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema, setting a baseline of 3. The description adds a small amount of meaning to the curve parameter by explaining that bezier tangents are horizontal at both ends, but it adds nothing about from/to attachment geometry, zOrder versus beforeShapeId interaction, or units beyond what the schema states.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Draw a line or curved connector between two shapes or points,' and adds that all OOXML bounding-box math (off/ext/flips, bezier path) is computed internally, which implicitly separates it from raw XML-editing siblings like edit_slide_xml. It does not name a sibling tool explicitly, so it falls short of a full 5.

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?

It establishes clear context for use — connecting two shapes or absolute points — and gives a rationale for choosing this tool over hand-rolled XML by citing the 'custGeom double-mirror pitfall' avoided by horizontal-tangent beziers. It offers no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative tool, so it stops at clear context rather than full routing.

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