office_docs_mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

word_get_outline

Retrieve a Word document's outline, including heading levels, paragraph count, and table count, to understand its structure.

Instructions

Get the outline of a Word document (.docx).

Returns total paragraph count, table count, and all headings with their levels.

Args:
    file_path: Path to the Word document (.docx).

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": {
      "file_path": "<file_path>"
    },
    "name": "word_get_outline"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file_path`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations are present, the description carries the burden, and it explicitly discloses what the tool returns: total paragraph count, table count, and all headings with levels. It does not mention side effects or error behavior, but 'Get' plus the return-oriented wording strongly imply a read-only operation.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the operation, the return values, and the parameter. The most important information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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?

For a simple single-parameter read-only tool, the description is complete. It names the input, the supported file type, and the output contents, so an agent has everything needed to call it 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 input schema only gives 'File Path' as a title, while the description adds that file_path is the path to the Word document (.docx). This provides essential format and purpose context, though it could further specify path conventions or required file existence.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get the outline of a Word document (.docx)', and clarifies the concrete outputs (paragraph count, table count, headings with levels). This distinguishes it from reading paragraphs or searching text without needing to inspect the schema.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. An agent must infer from the name that this is for outlines rather than for reading paragraphs or searching documents.

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