Persist changes to an open Word document and handle first-time saves through Word's default save behavior, which may prompt.
Save the document. If it has never been saved, Word applies its default save behavior (may prompt).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| documentId | No | Target document ID from list_documents. Optional when only one document is connected. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the first-save default behavior and possible prompt, which is genuine behavioral context. However, it says nothing about overwrite semantics, permissions, or whether saving an unmodified document is a no-op — significant gaps for a 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with no padding, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the edge-case caveat. Appropriately sized for a simple tool.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, it covers the main ambiguity (unsaved documents) but omits what saving actually affects and any error or permission conditions. Adequate, not complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the optional-when-one-document rule. The description adds nothing about documentId, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Save the document'), which is unambiguous and there is no sibling save tool to confuse it with. It doesn't distinguish itself from sibling read/inspect tools, but that distinction is self-evident from the verb.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to invoke this versus related operations (e.g., editing paragraphs then saving), and no prerequisites or post-conditions. The only conditional sentence addresses a first-save edge case, not tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.