office_docs_mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

word_append_paragraph

Append a paragraph or heading to the end of a Word document. Supports optional style and backup to preserve the original file.

Instructions

Append a paragraph or heading to the end of a Word document (.docx).

Args:
    file_path: Path to the Word document.
    text: Text to append.
    style: Optional style (e.g., 'Heading 1', 'Heading 2', 'List Bullet', or None for normal body).
    backup: If True, create a backup of the original file before modifying.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes
`style`	No
`backup`	No
`file_path`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the tool appends to the end of a file and, when backup=True, creates a backup before modifying, making the in-place mutation explicit. It does not disclose error behavior, permissions, or what happens if the file does not exist, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The one-sentence purpose is followed by a compact Args block with one line per parameter. No filler or redundant detail, and the most important action is front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers purpose and all parameters, and an output schema exists to handle return values. However, for a file-mutating tool it omits prerequisites (the document must already exist) and does not address error conditions or backup file naming. These are notable gaps given the absence of annotations.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description's Args block is the only source of parameter meaning. It defines all four parameters, including concrete examples for style and the functional effect of backup. This compensates well for the schema gap, though style examples are illustrative rather than exhaustive.

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 opens with a specific verb and direct object: 'Append a paragraph or heading to the end of a Word document (.docx).' This clearly identifies the operation and target resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like word_append_table_row and word_delete_paragraph. The action and scope are unambiguous.

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 provides clear context: it is for adding paragraph or heading content at the end of an existing Word document. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the purpose line plus style examples (e.g., 'Heading 1', 'List Bullet') imply common use cases effectively.

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