Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

create_workbook

Create a new .xlsx workbook at a specified path, defining sheet names with validation. Existing files can be overwritten with a backup rotation, preserving previous versions.

Instructions

Create a new .xlsx workbook at path with the given sheet names (default a single 'Sheet1'). Sheet names must be unique, at most 31 characters, and may not start or end with an apostrophe (Excel refuses to open such a file); the parent directory must already exist. An existing file at path is left untouched unless overwrite is true, in which case it is FIRST rotated into its .ks4xl-backups prev slot and then replaced (restore source='prev' brings it back). Returns the file path and the sheets created.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
sheetsNo
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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explaining exact side effects: existing files are untouched unless overwrite is true, overwrite first rotates the file into a .ks4xl-backups prev slot, and restore source='prev' recovers it. It also discloses validation constraints around sheet names and parent directory existence, giving the agent full awareness of consequences.

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 but every sentence earns its place: first the core creation action, then the sheet-name constraints and directory prerequisite, then overwrite/backup behavior and return value. There is no filler or repetition of schema defaults.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with three parameters, no output schema, and only readOnlyHint false as annotation, the description provides a complete picture: input semantics, defaults, validations, side effects, backup rotation, and return value. An agent has enough information to invoke it safely and correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries full responsibility for explaining parameters. It covers path, sheets (default to a single 'Sheet1', uniqueness, 31-character limit, apostrophe restriction), and overwrite (false leaves existing file untouched, true triggers backup rotation), providing meaning far beyond the raw schema.

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: 'Create a new .xlsx workbook at path with the given sheet names.' It also adds concrete details about defaults, overwrite behavior, and return values, which make the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinguish it from siblings like copy_workbook.

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 clearly implies the tool is for creating new workbooks, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. There is no 'use X instead' guidance relative to sibling tools, so the usage context is inferable rather than explicit.

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