A
licenseC
qualityF
maintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to create, read, edit, and format Microsoft Word documents through standardized tools and resources.
6
54
9,527 PyPI
2,106
MIT
Office-Word-MCP
by ihatesea69
Related Servers
Alternatives to Office-Word-MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server for creating, reading, and manipulating Microsoft Word documents, enabling AI assistants to work with Word files through document editing, formatting, and conversion capabilities.MIT
- -licenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceA Python server implementing Model Context Protocol for advanced Microsoft Word document manipulation, enabling programmatic automation of complex document processing tasks.-
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA comprehensive Model Context Protocol server that processes Microsoft Word documents with full formatting support, enabling text extraction, HTML/Markdown conversion, structure analysis, and image extraction.52-
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceA server providing tools to read, write, and edit Microsoft Word (docx) files through the Model Context Protocol, allowing operations like complete document reading, content creation, targeted paragraph editing, and text insertion.440MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that allows Claude Desktop to perform document operations on Microsoft Word, Excel, and PDF files including creation, editing, and format conversion.52MIT
TDQS
C2.4/5.0
Scored across 54 tools
Disambiguation2/5
Multiple footnote tools (e.g., add_footnote_enhanced, add_footnote_robust) have overlapping purposes, causing confusion. Similarly, there are many very similar table manipulation tools. The boundaries between tools are often unclear.
Naming Consistency3/5
Overall follows verb_noun pattern but with inconsistencies like 'add_footnote_enhanced' vs 'add_footnote_to_document' and 'delete_footnote_robust'. Some tools use vague suffixes like '_robust' that break consistency.
Tool Count2/5
54 tools is excessive for a Word document server. Many tools are redundant (e.g., 5+ footnote adding methods) and could be consolidated. The count suggests poor scoping and duplication.
Completeness3/5
Covers basic CRUD, text manipulation, tables, footnotes, comments, and protection. However, lacks common features like track changes, mail merge, headers/footers (document headers), and more advanced layout options.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues