Табуля

files_conditional_formats

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the conditional formatting rules defined in a Tabulya file, so you can inspect existing rules before adding or replacing them. Scans every sheet unless 'sheet' is given. Each rule is { sheet, id, range (A1), type ('formula', 'color_scale', 'data_bar' or 'aggregate'), apply_to_blank; for formula rules also formula (the condition) and style (applied bold/italic/underline/strikethrough/text_color/fill_color); for color scales also color_scale; for data bars also data_bar; aggregate rules come from Excel workbooks and are computed over the whole range (duplicate/unique values, top or bottom N, above or below average) — they carry rule and style, and cannot be created or edited here. Read-only; reflects the file's latest live state. Signature: files_conditional_formats(file_uuid, sheet?).

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_uuid": "<file_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "files_conditional_formats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sheet`	No	Restrict to this sheet (defaults to all sheets).
`file_uuid`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`file_uuid`	Yes
`conditional_formats`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description still earns credit by adding that results reflect 'the file's latest live state' and that aggregate rules 'cannot be created or edited here', which is a real capability constraint not in the annotations. The per-type rule shape adds further behavioral context.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the opening clause, but the body is one long run-on paragraph that enumerates every returned field per rule type. Since an output schema already exists, that enumeration is largely redundant and crowds out the operational guidance.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only listing tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers scope, live-state behavior, mutability limits on aggregate rules, and return shape. Only minor gaps remain (e.g., behavior on a file with no rules, any paging limits), which the output schema partly absorbs.

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?

With only 50% schema coverage the description must compensate, and it does: 'sheet' semantics are stated in prose (all sheets by default) and the file_uuid role is implied by 'defined in a Tabulya file' with an explicit signature. It adds only modest meaning beyond the schema's own sheet description, so it lands just above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the conditional formatting rules defined in a Tabulya file') and implicitly separates itself from the mutation siblings by framing itself as the inspect step before 'adding or replacing' rules. An agent can distinguish it from files_set_conditional_format and files_delete_conditional_format without opening either schema.

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?

Gives the workflow context explicitly ('so you can inspect existing rules before adding or replacing them') and states the default scope ('Scans every sheet unless sheet is given'). It stops short of naming the sibling tools to use for the subsequent add/replace step, so it is clear but not fully routing.

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

All Табуля tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?