Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Docling MCP

Docling MCP

Official
by docling-project
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Add paragraph to Docling document

add_paragraph_to_docling_document

Insert a new paragraph into a cached document under a specified section header and level, allowing you to extend existing documents with additional text content.

Instructions

Add a paragraph of text to an existing document in the local document cache.

This tool inserts a new paragraph under the specified section header and level into a document that has already been processed and stored in the cache.

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": {
      "document_key": "<document_key>",
      "paragraph": "<paragraph>"
    },
    "name": "add_paragraph_to_docling_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paragraphYesThe text content to add as a paragraph.
document_keyYesThe unique identifier of the document in the local cache.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
document_keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that the paragraph is inserted 'under the specified section header and level,' but the input schema has no parameters for a section header or level, making this claim confusing and under-specified. No further behavioral detail is provided about positioning, ordering, or side effects.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence. However, the two sentences are somewhat redundant: 'existing document in the local document cache' and 'already been processed and stored in the cache' convey nearly the same information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not necessary here. However, the description references a 'specified section header and level' without explaining how those are supplied, since neither appears in the input schema. It also does not indicate how the paragraph anchors to existing document structure, leaving an important invocation gap for a mutation tool in a large sibling family.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description reinforces that document_key identifies a cached document and paragraph is the text content, but adds no additional formatting, syntax, or location semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Add a paragraph of text to an existing document in the local document cache.' It also mentions placement 'under the specified section header and level,' which helps distinguish it from sibling tools that add titles, headings, or list items, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives a clear precondition: the document must already be processed and stored in the cache. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over sibling tools like add_section_heading_to_docling_document or add_list_items_to_list_in_docling_document, nor does it provide any explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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