mcp-google-sheets-server

sheets_hide_sheet

Hide a specified sheet within a Google Sheets spreadsheet by providing the spreadsheet ID and sheet ID.

Instructions

Hide a sheet from view (make it invisible)

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>",
      "sheetId": "<sheetId>"
    },
    "name": "sheets_hide_sheet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sheetId`	Yes	The ID of the sheet to hide
`spreadsheetId`	Yes	The ID of the spreadsheet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.1Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description indicates a mutating action but does not disclose potential side effects, reversibility, or any preconditions. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it falls short of transparency.

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, straightforward sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and to the point.

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 tool is simple and the description covers the core action. However, it could briefly mention that hiding is reversible or that the sheet is not deleted, which would provide better context for an agent.

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?

Both parameters are described with their IDs, but the descriptions are minimal and do not add meaningful context beyond the schema types. They are self-explanatory, meeting baseline expectations without enrichment.

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 action and its effect (hide a sheet from view). It is specific and unambiguous, and the phrase 'make it invisible' reinforces the meaning.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Although sibling tools like sheets_show_sheet exist, the description does not mention them or any conditions for choosing this tool.

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