Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Hangeul-mcp

Hangeul-mcp

by pblsketch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

split_merged_cell

Split a merged table cell in a HWP or HWPX file and save the modified document as a new file.

Instructions

Split a previously merged table cell apart and write a NEW file (delegate).

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>",
      "table_index": "<table_index>",
      "row": "<row>",
      "col": "<col>",
      "out_path": "<out_path>"
    },
    "name": "split_merged_cell"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
colYes
rowYes
pathYes
out_pathYes
table_indexYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions splitting and writing a new file; it does not disclose whether the original file is modified, authentication needs, or other side effects.

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 description is a single sentence, which is concise but under-specifies crucial details; it could be expanded without losing conciseness.

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 5 required parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly; it lacks prerequisites, behavior details, and parameter explanations.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter meaning beyond the field names, leaving the agent to infer the roles of path, table_index, row, col, and out_path.

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?

The description clearly states the action 'split' and the resource 'previously merged table cell', and distinguishes it from siblings like 'merge_table_cells' by mentioning it writes a new file.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for splitting merged cells, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool over alternatives, such as the inverse operation merge_table_cells.

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