mcp-google-sheets-server

sheets_format_cells

Format spreadsheet cells by adjusting fonts, colors, borders, and alignment.

Instructions

Apply formatting to cells including colors, fonts, borders, and alignment

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "spreadsheetId": "<spreadsheetId>",
      "range": "<range>"
    },
    "name": "sheets_format_cells"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bold`	No	Whether text is bold
`range`	Yes	The range to format (e.g., A1:C10)
`italic`	No	Whether text is italic
`borders`	No	Border settings for top, bottom, left, right
`fontSize`	No	Font size
`textColor`	No	Text color object with red, green, blue, alpha values
`spreadsheetId`	Yes	The ID of the spreadsheet
`backgroundColor`	No	Background color object with red, green, blue, alpha values
`verticalAlignment`	No	Vertical alignment
`horizontalAlignment`	No	Horizontal alignment

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.1Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, idempotency, or whether existing formatting is overwritten or merged. It is purely a statement of capability.

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 a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential information efficiently.

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?

The description gives the core context (what and where) but lacks details on how optional parameters interact, default behavior, or the resulting state of formatted cells. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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?

All 10 parameters have descriptions, including explanations for nested objects like color and border settings. The descriptions add value beyond the schema types (e.g., 'Color object with red, green, blue, alpha values'), though the structure of nested objects could be more explicit.

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's action ('Apply formatting') and resource ('cells'), and specifies the formatting categories (colors, fonts, borders, alignment). It is distinct from sibling tools like sheets_set_formula or sheets_conditional_formatting.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., conditional formatting, merging cells, or setting formulas). No comparison or condition is given.

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