mcp-google-sheets-server

sheets_protect_range

Prevent unauthorized edits to a spreadsheet range. Configure warning-only or strict editing restrictions for specific cells.

Instructions

Protect a range of cells from editing

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_protect_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`range`	Yes	The range to protect
`description`	No	Description of the protection
`warningOnly`	No	Whether to show warning only or prevent editing
`spreadsheetId`	Yes	The ID of the spreadsheet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.1Sep 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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, whether the action is reversible, or if it requires special permissions. The lack of any behavioral detail leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's impact.

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 extremely brief and to the point, with no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core function without unnecessary words.

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 lack of an output schema means the agent cannot anticipate the return value or confirmation. The description does not mention any related steps or special considerations. However, the simplicity of the operation and the clear parameter definitions provide some context.

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 four parameters are described in the schema, covering the essential fields. Descriptions are concise and understandable (e.g., 'warningOnly' explains its purpose). While minimal, they are adequate for an agent to infer the meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (protect) and the resource (range of cells). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like sheets_get_data and sheets_update_data. However, it could be more specific about the mechanism or effect of protection (e.g., permissions, warnings).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as the need to obtain a spreadsheet ID or the format of the range string. No context on how this fits into a workflow.

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