Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
indesign-nutria-mcp

indesign-nutria-mcp

by nutriandrea
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

anchoredObject_create

Create an anchored object at a story insertion point or attach it to a text frame in Adobe InDesign.

Instructions

Create an anchored object at an insertion point or attach to a text frame

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": {
      "storyIndex": "<storyIndex>",
      "insertionIndex": "<insertionIndex>",
      "contentType": "<contentType>",
      "width": "<width>",
      "height": "<height>"
    },
    "name": "anchoredObject_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
widthYes
heightYes
xOffsetNo
yOffsetNo
spaceAboveNo
storyIndexYes
anchorPointNotopLeft
contentTypeYes
document_idNoWhich open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document.
insertionIndexYes
anchoredPositionNocustom

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.6.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It is a mutation/creation tool, yet the description says nothing about required permissions, whether the target document must already be open, what happens on failure, or what the resulting object/response looks like. The one sentence only restates purpose.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of waste, so it reads cleanly. However, for an 11-parameter creation tool with no annotations it is under-sized rather than appropriately concise, leaving most call-relevant detail unaddressed.

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 high complexity (11 params, 5 required, three enums), no annotations, and no output schema, a one-line description is inadequate. An agent lacks the behavioral and parameter context needed to invoke this reliably.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 9% across 11 parameters (only document_id is documented), so the description must compensate and does not. It alludes loosely to 'insertion point' (insertionIndex) and 'text frame' (contentType), but leaves width, height, xOffset, yOffset, spaceAbove, anchorPoint, and anchoredPosition entirely unexplained.

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 gives a specific verb (Create) and resource (anchored object) and even names two placement modes: 'at an insertion point or attach to a text frame.' This distinguishes it from its direct siblings like anchoredObject_setPosition or anchoredObject_release, though it does not explicitly differentiate from text_addFrame or shape_create.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternatives. It hints at two modes but does not say when to prefer one over the other, nor mention that a document must be open (implied only by the document_id parameter).

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