Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Clear Filter

clear_filter
Destructive

Remove a sheet's active autofilter and unhide the rows it hid, returning the count of unhidden rows. Refuses when no autofilter is present or the workbook is hazardous unless allowed.

Instructions

Remove the autofilter from a sheet and unhide the rows it hid, the reverse of set_filter. location or sheet picks the sheet; the sheet's active autofilter range is used when location is omitted. A sheet with no autofilter refuses (NOT_FOUND) rather than silently no-opping. Returns how many rows were unhidden. A hazardous workbook refuses unless allow_loss is true. Auto-backup: prev/anchor slots in .ks4xl-backups; atomic verified save. Refuses while open in Excel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
sheetNo
backupNo
locationNo
allow_lossNo
verify_comNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / location / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / location / title
      Removed value: -"Location"
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses a refusal behavior for sheets with no autofilter (NOT_FOUND), the return value (number of unhidden rows), hazardous-workbook gating via allow_loss, auto-backup behavior, atomic verified save, and refusal while open in Excel. This is rich, non-obvious behavioral detail.

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?

Four sentences, all dense with meaningful informationeb. The core action is front-loaded, and each sentence contributes a distinct fact: behavior, sheet selection, failure mode, return value, safety/backup, and locking. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the main purpose, failure behavior, return value, safety gating, backup details, and lock condition despite no output schema. The only notable gap is the undocumented verify_com parameter, and path is left to assumption, but overall the definition is strong and actionable.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates for several key parameters: location and sheet selection, allow_loss for hazardous workbooks, and backup behavior. However, path and verify_com remain semantically unexplained beyond their names and types, so the compensation is not complete.

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 resource: 'Remove the autofilter from a sheet and unhide the rows it hid.' It also explicitly labels this as 'the reverse of set_filter,' distinguishing it from the most relevant sibling tool and making the tool's function 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 gives clear context for when this is applicable: it is the reverse of set_filter, and it explains sheet selection semantics via location or sheet. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives to avoid or conditions like 'use when a filter is active,' though the sibling reference partially covers this.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools