Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

clear_range

Clear Excel cell or range contents, formats, or both, with automatic backup and safety controls for loss prevention.

Instructions

Clear a cell or range: what='contents' removes values and formulas, 'formats' resets styles to default, 'all' does both. Neither removes merges, conditional formats, validations, comments, or hyperlinks; those have their own manage tools. Addressed by a location object. A hazardous workbook refuses unless allow_loss is true. Auto-backup: prev/anchor slots in .ks4xl-backups (backup=false skips rotation); atomic verified save, restored on failed verify. Refuses while open in Excel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
whatNocontents
sheetNo
backupNo
locationYes
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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / location / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
  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 single readOnlyHint=false annotation, the description discloses substantial behavior: destructive scope per 'what' mode, non-removal of merges/conditional formats/validations/comments/hyperlinks, refusal for hazardous workbooks unless allow_loss is true, auto-backup rotation behavior, atomic verified save with restore-on-failure, and refusal while open in Excel. This is far above typical annotation coverage and contains 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense yet efficient: five sentences, each earning its place by covering a distinct facet—core operation, exclusions, location, safety/allow_loss, backup/verification, and Excel lock. It is front-loaded with the primary action and most important parameter, with no filler or repetition.

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 mutation tool with seven parameters and no output schema, the description covers the critical operational semantics well: what is cleared, what is not, destructive safeguards, backup, and lock behavior. Still, verify_com and sheet semantics are left to inference, and there is no mention of return behavior, leaving a minor completeness gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It adds meaningful semantics for what ('contents', 'formats', 'all'), backup (skips rotation when false), allow_loss (hazardous workbook refusal), and location (addressed by a location object). However, path, sheet, and verify_com are not explained, so compensation is strong but incomplete.

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: 'Clear a cell or range,' then defines the exact variants via the 'what' parameter. It also distinguishes the tool from sibling operations by explicitly stating what it does not remove (merges, conditional formats, validations, comments, hyperlinks), which prevents confusion with dedicated management tools.

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 tool is appropriate and explicitly says that certain artifacts are not handled because 'those have their own manage tools.' It does not name specific sibling tools or contrast with write_range/set_cell, but the scope and exclusions are concrete enough to guide selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools