Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
WPS Office MCP

WPS Office MCP

by ZNaiGaomu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

wps_excel_get_cell_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get cell details such as value, formula, and format by specifying the sheet name and cell address in the active spreadsheet.

Instructions

获取单元格的详细信息（值、公式、格式等）。

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": {
      "sheet": "<sheet>",
      "cell": "<cell>"
    },
    "name": "wps_excel_get_cell_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cellYes单元格地址，如 A1
sheetYes工作表名称

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0-hardened.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the scope of returned content (value, formula, format, etc.) but does not disclose behavior for invalid cells or the exact output structure. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single compact sentence with no wasted words. The core action and return scope are front-loaded clearly.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with two required parameters, the description is sufficient for selection and basic invocation. However, with no output schema, it could be more explicit about what 'format' includes, leaving some ambiguity about the exact detailed information returned.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify cell address semantics or sheet naming conventions.

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 a specific verb and resource: retrieve detailed cell information (value, formula, format, etc.). It meaningfully distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like wps_excel_get_cell_value and wps_excel_get_formula, which focus on individual aspects.

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 use when comprehensive cell details are needed, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to prefer a simpler getter. No exclusions or conditions are provided, so the usage guidance is more implied than explicit.

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