Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Copy Workbook

copy_workbook

Copy a workbook byte-for-byte to a new path, keeping all content intact (charts, shapes, macros). Overwrite safely with backup rotation for recovery.

Instructions

Copy a workbook file byte-for-byte from src to dst, so nothing in the original is re-serialized or degraded (charts, shapes, macros, and queries all carry over intact). An existing dst is left untouched unless overwrite is true, in which case dst is FIRST rotated into its .ks4xl-backups prev slot and then replaced (restore source='prev' brings it back). Returns the destination path. Use this to branch a working copy before a risky batch of edits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dstYes
srcYes
overwriteNo

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. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description details the overwrite behavior, including the rotation into .ks4xl-backups and restoration via source='prev'. This goes well beyond the annotations, which only set destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false. It also clarifies that existing files are untouched unless overwrite=true, providing crucial 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value: the byte-for-byte guarantee, overwrite/backup behavior, return value, and use case. There is no fluff, and the length is appropriate for the complexity.

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 return value (destination path), the overwrite and backup mechanism, and the intended use case. It does not mention error conditions (e.g., missing source) or limitations, but for a copy tool with this complexity, the provided information is nearly complete. A minor gap exists regarding edge cases, but it is not critical.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the effect of 'overwrite' thoroughly but does not elaborate on 'src' and 'dst' beyond implying they are file paths. The description adds meaning for overwrite but leaves src/dst semantics to inference, which is a gap given zero schema documentation.

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 clearly states the tool copies a workbook file byte-for-byte from src to dst, emphasizing integrity preservation. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like copy_range by focusing on whole-workbook copying and mentions 'branch a working copy', which is a specific purpose.

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?

It provides a clear use case: 'Use this to branch a working copy before a risky batch of edits.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives (e.g., copy_range for ranges). The context is sufficient but lacks explicit exclusions.

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