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

indesign-nutria-mcp

by nutriandrea
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

xml_export

Export an open InDesign document's structure to an XML file at the specified path, choosing the document by name or index.

Instructions

Export document structure as XML

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": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>"
    },
    "name": "xml_export"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYes
document_idNoWhich open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.6.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
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 does not disclose whether filePath is overwritten, whether the document must be open, what XML structure means, or what happens on failure.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Its brevity is appropriate structurally, though the content is under-specified.

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?

For an export tool with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is too thin. It omits critical context about file handling, document state requirements, and expected output.

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 50%; document_id is documented in the schema, but filePath is not described in either the schema or the description. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the tool name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Export document structure as XML'. It is distinguishable from xml_import and xml_listTags, but does not explicitly clarify how it differs from export_document or export_getXmlTags.

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 on when to use this instead of export_document, export_getXmlTags, or xml_import. The agent must infer the appropriate export scenario.

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