Insert an Excel formula into a specific cell of an existing .xlsx file by specifying the file path, sheet, and cell reference.
Add a formula to an Excel cell.
Args: path: Path to the .xlsx file sheet_name: Sheet name cell: Cell reference (e.g., 'A4') formula: Excel formula (e.g., '=SUM(A1:A3)')
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cell | Yes | ||
| path | Yes | ||
| formula | Yes | ||
| sheet_name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the action but does not disclose whether the file is modified in place, whether an existing cell value is overwritten, whether the formula is evaluated, or what happens if the sheet or cell is invalid.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the parameter list is clean and scannable. Every sentence earns its place without redundant phrasing.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description fully documents the required parameters and gives examples, so an agent can construct a valid call. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits important behavioral details such as return values, side effects, and error/overwrite behavior, leaving it adequate but not complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a meaningful one-line explanation for each of the four parameters and includes concrete examples for 'cell' and 'formula.' This gives the agent substantially more semantic information than the bare schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
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: 'Add a formula to an Excel cell.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like add_excel_chart or write_excel_data based on the object being added.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage context is implied by the tool's purpose: use this when a formula needs to be inserted into an Excel cell. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over write_excel_data or when not to use it, and no alternatives are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.