Skip to main content
Glama
rcarmo

office-document-mcp-server

by rcarmo

office_audit

Read-only

Audit Office documents for unfilled placeholders, completion issues, pending track changes, formatting problems, empty Excel cells, incorrect totals, and invalid date formats.

Instructions

Audit documents for completeness, placeholders, and issues.

Replaces: excel_audit_placeholders, word_audit_completion, word_audit_sow, pptx_audit_placeholders

Examples: # Check for unfilled placeholders office_audit(file_path="contract.docx", checks=["placeholders"])

# Full completion audit
office_audit(file_path="sow.docx", checks=["completion"])

# Check Excel for placeholders
office_audit(file_path="estimate.xlsx", checks=["placeholders"])

# Multiple checks
office_audit(
    file_path="document.docx",
    checks=["placeholders", "tracking"]
)

Args: file_path: Path to the document checks: List of checks to perform: - "placeholders": Find unfilled <...>, [...], [TBD] patterns - "completion": Full completion audit (Word SOW) - "tracking": Check for pending track changes - "formatting": Check for formatting issues - "empty_cells": Check required Excel cells for empty values - "totals": Verify Excel totals based on configured ranges - "dates": Validate Excel date formats (MM/DD/YYYY) audit_config: Optional configuration for Excel checks: - required_cells: list of cell refs to check for empty values - date_cells: list of cell refs to validate as MM/DD/YYYY - totals: list of dicts with sum_range, target, and optional tolerance

Returns: Dictionary with audit findings

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_pathYesPath to the document
checksNoList of checks to perform audit_config: Optional configuration for Excel checks:
audit_configNo
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds the list of checks and configuration details but does not expand on behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. With annotations present, the description adds some context but is not essential.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections for purpose, replacements, examples, args, and returns. It is somewhat lengthy but front-loaded with the main purpose. Every section adds value, and the examples are helpful.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, nested object, no output schema), the description is thorough: it explains all checks, the audit_config structure, and return format. The 'Replaces' line and examples provide sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description provides an 'Args' section that explains each parameter, including the enum values for 'checks' and the subfields of 'audit_config', which go beyond the schema's descriptions. Schema coverage is 67%, and the description compensates by detailing optional configuration.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Audit documents for completeness, placeholders, and issues.' It also lists the tools it replaces, distinguishing it from siblings like excel_audit_placeholders and word_audit_completion.

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?

The description explicitly states 'Replaces: excel_audit_placeholders, word_audit_completion, word_audit_sow, pptx_audit_placeholders,' which tells when to use this tool. Examples further clarify usage scenarios. It does not explicitly say when not to use, but the replacement guidance is strong.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rcarmo/python-office-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server