Skip to main content
Glama

Google_sheets

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Sheets Append

sheets_append
Idempotent

Append new rows to the end of a Google Sheet table. Specify sheet name and row data to add.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rangeYesA1 notation range to append after (e.g., "Sheet1!A1")
valuesYesArray of rows to append
spreadsheet_idYesSpreadsheet ID
value_input_optionNoHow to interpret input. USER_ENTERED (default) parses formulas/dates/numbers. RAW stores literal strings.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNoError code if connection required
messageNoError message if connection required
updatedRowsNoNumber of rows appended
updatedCellsNoTotal number of cells appended
updatedRangeNoRange where data was appended
spreadsheetIdNoSpreadsheet ID appended to
updatedColumnsNoNumber of columns updated

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no new behavioral context (e.g., that multiple calls may duplicate rows, or that the table must exist). No contradiction.

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 one sentence, highly concise, but omits important details that could be included without excessive length. It is front-loaded but not optimally informative.

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?

Given the output schema exists, return values are covered. Parameters are documented. However, missing context includes idempotent behavior effects and prerequisite that the sheet/table must exist. Adequate but not complete.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds 'sheet name and row data' which matches 'range' and 'values', but does not add meaning beyond the schema for 'spreadsheet_id' or 'value_input_option'. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'append' and the resource 'Google Sheet table', and it distinguishes from sibling tools like sheets_read and sheets_write by specifying 'append to the end of a table'. However, it could be more precise about the 'table' concept.

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 implicitly indicates use for adding rows, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to siblings like sheets_write (which might overwrite) or sheets_create (for new sheets).

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

All Google_sheets toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are nearly identical: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly the same, and ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all serve overlapping research/query purposes. discover_tools and suggest_questions both act as discovery entry points, while the five polymarket tools differentiate primarily through intricate details that are easy to confuse.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are mixed across the set: verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, resolve_entity, validate_claim), noun_verb (sheets_append, sheets_create), noun_noun (polymarket_arbitrage, entity_profile), and bare verbs (forget, recall, subscribe). The sheets tools are internally consistent but the broader collection has no uniform pattern, with awkward names like pipeworx_trending and search_within.

Tool Count2/5

With 36 tools, the server exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. The Google Sheets portion accounts for only 5 tools, while the majority are highly specialized Pipeworx and Polymarket tools that could be consolidated or dramatically reduced. The count feels inflated relative to the advertised 'Google_sheets' server name and its actual core purpose.

Completeness2/5

For a server named Google_sheets, the essential operations exist (create, read, write, append, list structure), but there is no delete/clear range tool and no way to add a new sheet to an existing spreadsheet. For the broader data/research scope, important lifecycles are missing (e.g., no direct way to write Pipeworx results into Sheets, no update for subscriptions, only cancel). The set falls short of fully covering either domain.

Resources