Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

format_cells

Apply Excel cell formatting (number, font, fill, border, alignment) to a range while preserving unspecified style attributes, with backup and verified save.

Instructions

Apply formatting to a range, merging onto the existing style so unspecified attributes are preserved. number_format is an Excel format code; font is {name, size, bold, italic, underline, strike, color}; fill is {color} or {pattern, fg, bg}; border is {style, color, sides}; alignment is {horizontal, vertical, wrap_text, text_rotation, indent}; colors are hex. Named styles and conditional formats: design pack. Hazard-gated (allow_loss overrides); auto-backup; atomic verified save. Refuses while open in Excel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fillNo
fontNo
pathYes
sheetNo
backupNo
borderNo
locationYes
alignmentNo
allow_lossNo
verify_comNo
number_formatNo

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 readOnlyHint=false annotation, the description discloses material behavioral traits: it is hazard-gated with allow_loss as an override, performs auto-backup, uses an atomic verified save, and refuses to run while the file is open in Excel. This substantially informs risk assessment during invocation.

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 highly efficient. Every sentence conveys needed information: the merge behavior, the format code representations, hazard handling, backup behavior, and operational constraints. It front-loads the core purpose and keeps supporting detail compact.

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 complex 11-parameter tool with no output schema and no per-parameter schema descriptions, this is a thorough definition. It covers formatting object structures, safety overrides, persistence behavior, and a concurrency constraint. The main gaps are the undocumented verify_com parameter and the absence of any guidance on return values or verification steps after the atomic save.

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 takes on the documentation burden and does so well for most formatting parameters: it explains number_format, font, fill, border, alignment, and hex colors. It does not fully explain every parameter such as verify_com or the exact accepted shape of location, so the compensation is strong but 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: 'Apply formatting to a range'. It further distinguishes this tool from simple cell writes by explicitly stating it merges onto the existing style and preserves unspecified attributes, which makes its role among the large sibling set clear.

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: this is the tool for range formatting with style merging, not for raw cell values or structural operations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5, but the scope is clear enough for an agent to avoid the most obvious mis-routings.

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