doc-control

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

toc_insert

Inserts a table of contents field after a specified paragraph as tracked changes. Run field.update to populate entries and page numbers.

Instructions

Insert a table of contents (a TOC field) after a body paragraph after (p1#a1b2c3d4), as tracked insertions: a title (default "Contents", "" for none), the field listing heading levels levels (default "1-3") with a placeholder result, and a closing paragraph. Run field.update next to fill in the entries and page numbers (until then field.list shows it stale). Backed up and undoable (history.undo); dry_run previews. Returns the field paragraph's address.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`doc`	Yes	Path to the .docx.
`tag`	No	Appended to the author.
`after`	Yes	Address of the body paragraph it goes after.
`title`	No	Title paragraph above it (default "Contents"); "" for none.
`author`	No	Revision author.
`expect`	No	Write guard: the sha256 read earlier (doc.info, or a reply's doc.sha256), e.g. {"sha256": "9f86d081…"}; a file changed since is DOC_CHANGED_ON_DISK.
`levels`	No	Heading levels it lists, e.g. "1-3" (default) or "2".
`dry_run`	No	Preview only; write nothing.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Always true on success.
`op`	Yes	The operation that ran.
`api`	Yes	API version (1.0).
`doc`	No	The document read or written: path, sha256 and paragraph count.
`next`	Yes	Cursor for the next page (pass as cursor), or null.
`result`	Yes	What the operation returns.
`warnings`	Yes	Things to know about the result.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.2Oct 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / expect / description

Added value: +"Write guard: the sha256 read earlier (doc.info, or a reply's doc.sha256), e.g. {\"sha256\": \"9f86d081…\"}; a file changed since is DOC_CHANGED_ON_DISK."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "api": {
+      "description": "API version (1.0).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "doc": {
+      "description": "The document read or written: path, sha256 and paragraph count.",
+      "properties": {
+        "characters": {
+          "description": "text.normalize of a text string: its length.",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "paragraphs": {
+          "description": "Body paragraphs.",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "path": {
+          "description": "Path of the document.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "sha256": {
+          "description": "sha256 of the file (pass as expect.sha256 to a write).",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "source": {
+          "description": "A .txt/.md/.odt source's format, encoding and split mode; \"text\" for a text string (text.normalize).",
+          "type": [
+            "object",
+            "string"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "next": {
+      "description": "Cursor for the next page (pass as cursor), or null.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Always true on success.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "op": {
+      "description": "The operation that ran.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "description": "What the operation returns.",
+      "properties": {
+        "after": {
+          "description": "Address of the paragraph it went after.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "at": {
+          "description": "Address of the field's paragraph.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "author": {
+          "description": "Revision author stamped on the changes.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "backup": {
+          "description": "Path of the backup taken before the write.",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "code": {
+          "description": "The field code.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "date": {
+          "description": "Revision date (UTC, ISO 8601).",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "dry_run": {
+          "description": "True when nothing was written (a preview).",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "footprint": {
+          "description": "Part name -> the paragraphs or items it touched in that part.",
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "op_id": {
+          "description": "Undo-log id of this write (history.undo / history.restore).",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "revision_ids": {
+          "description": "w:id of every revision this write created.",
+          "items": {
+            "type": [
+              "integer",
+              "string"
+            ]
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "sha256": {
+          "description": "sha256 of the file after the write (pass as expect.sha256 next).",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "title": {
+          "description": "The title paragraph's text, or null for none.",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "dry_run",
+        "at",
+        "after",
+        "code",
+        "title",
+        "revision_ids"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "description": "Things to know about the result.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "api",
+    "ok",
+    "op",
+    "result",
+    "warnings",
+    "next"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Oct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: the insertion is tracked as revisions, the operation is backed up and reversible via history.undo, dry_run previews, and the field is left with a placeholder result until refreshed. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core action and position, and every clause carries real information, though the heavy parenthetical nesting makes it denser than ideal. No wasted sentences.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For an 8-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering dependency with field.update, safety (backup/undo/dry_run), and the return value's meaning. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 parameters are already documented in the schema; the description restates defaults for `title` and `levels` and gives an example address format for `after`, which is only marginally additive. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Insert a table of contents (a TOC field)') plus the exact position anchor ('after a body paragraph `after`'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like index_insert or field_update.

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?

Gives a clear workflow instruction ('Run field.update next to fill in the entries and page numbers') and notes that field.list shows the result as stale until then, so the agent knows the follow-up step. It does not explicitly contrast with index_insert, but the context of use is unambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server