Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DOCX MCP Server

DOCX MCP Server

by lihongjie0209
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

docx-open

Opens a .docx file from disk into memory and returns an ID for subsequent editing.

Instructions

Open a .docx file from disk into memory and return id.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "docx-open"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states the basic action without addressing file existence requirements, permission needs, or memory implications. The description is insufficient for understanding side effects or preconditions.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is not complete. It lacks critical details like expected path format, optional parameter role, and return value structure. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool without additional information.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description does not explain the parameters 'id' and 'path'. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it only mentions 'path' implicitly. The 'id' parameter is completely undocumented, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 clearly states the verb 'Open' and the resource '.docx file', specifying the action of loading from disk into memory and returning an id. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'docx-openFile', which might have a similar purpose, leaving potential ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docx-create or docx-openFile. The description lacks any contextual cues for tool selection.

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