Skip to main content
Glama
KitchenSink4AI

io.github.nometalalchemist/kitchensink4xl

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Set Cell

set_cell
DestructiveIdempotent

Write a value to a specific cell in an Excel workbook, storing strings beginning with '=' as formulas while using backups and safety checks to prevent data loss.

Instructions

Write a single cell addressed by a location object. A string beginning with '=' is ALWAYS stored as a formula (there is no literal escape), normalized so modern functions do not land as #NAME? and flagged to recalculate on open; anything else is a literal. 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
sheetNo
valueYesA cell value: text, a number, a boolean, or null to clear. A string beginning with '=' is stored as a formula.
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. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / location / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / value / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Added value: +"A cell value: text, a number, a boolean, or null to clear. A string beginning with '=' is stored as a formula."
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond annotations: formula normalization with no literal escape, recalc-on-open flag, hazardous-workbook refusal tied to allow_loss, auto-backup rotation in .ks4xl-backups, atomic verified save with restore, and refusal while open in Excel. These explain real operational constraints and failure modes that the annotations do not capture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is dense but well-organized: it front-loads the core action, then moves through formula handling, hazard gating, backup/save integrity, and Excel lock. Each sentence contributes distinct information, though the length is at the upper boundary of 'concise' for a tool of this complexity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 7-parameter mutation with no output schema and only 14% schema coverage, the description covers the critical invariants (formula behavior, hazard gate, backup, Excel lock) but omits the structure of the location object and the meaning of verify_com. These gaps matter because an agent cannot construct a correct call without understanding how to address a cell location.

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 coverage is only 14%, so the description must compensate for underdocumented parameters. It adds meaning for backup (prev/anchor rotation and backup=false skipping) and allow_loss (needed for hazardous workbooks), and clarifies value semantics. However, location is only called an object, and verify_com, sheet, and path receive no additional explanation, leaving key parameter behavior underspecified for such a low-coverage 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 'Write a single cell addressed by a location object,' which names the specific verb, resource, and scope. The 'single cell' qualifier distinguishes it from range-oriented siblings like write_range, set_cells, and clear_range, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 implies usage through 'single cell' and explains formula vs literal behavior, but it never explicitly states when to choose set_cell over set_formula, write_range, or apply_edits. There are no exclusions or 'use this instead when...' notes, leaving the agent to infer the boundary from the scope wording.

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