Excel MCP Server

Copy range

copy_range

Destructive

Copies cell values and formatting to a new location, overwriting the destination. Adjusts relative formula references as when pasting in Excel.

Instructions

Copy values and formatting to another place, overwriting the destination.

Relative references in copied formulas shift the way they do when pasting in Excel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Path to an .xlsx, .xlsm, .xltx or .xltm file. Relative paths are resolved in the server's workbook directory when one is configured; otherwise use an absolute path.
`range`	Yes	A cell or rectangular range in A1 notation, e.g. 'A1:D20'.
`sheet`	Yes	Worksheet name, e.g. 'Sheet1'.
`target_cell`	Yes	Top-left cell of the destination.
`target_sheet`	No	Destination sheet. Default: the same sheet.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedv1.1.1Sep 29, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / filepath

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Filepath",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / path

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Path to an .xlsx, .xlsm, .xltx or .xltm file. Relative paths are resolved in the server's workbook directory when one is configured; otherwise use an absolute path.",
+  "title": "Path",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / range

Added value: +{
+  "description": "A cell or rectangular range in A1 notation, e.g. 'A1:D20'.",
+  "title": "Range",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / sheet

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Worksheet name, e.g. 'Sheet1'.",
+  "title": "Sheet",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / sheet_name

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Sheet Name",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / source_end

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Source End",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / source_start

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Source Start",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / target_cell

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Top-left cell of the destination.",
+  "title": "Target Cell",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / target_sheet / description

Added value: +"Destination sheet. Default: the same sheet."

removedInput schema / properties / target_start

Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Target Start",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "filepath",
-  "sheet_name",
-  "source_start",
-  "source_end",
-  "target_start"
-]New value: +[
+  "path",
+  "sheet",
+  "range",
+  "target_cell"
+]

First observedv1.0.0Aug 15, 2025

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already disclose destructive=true, readOnly=false, and non-idempotent, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond that by spelling out that the destination is overwritten and that relative references in copied formulas shift as in Excel paste — genuinely useful behavioral context not present in structured fields.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, front-loaded with the core action and the overwrite consequence. The formula-shift note is secondary and correctly placed second.

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?

With an output schema present and full annotation coverage, the remaining burden is behavioral nuance, which the description largely handles (overwrite + formula shifting). Minor gaps remain, such as cross-sheet target behavior and whether formatting overwrite is partial or full, but nothing essential is missing.

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%, including defaults for target_sheet, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds essentially no parameter-level detail (e.g., interaction between range shape and target_cell), making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (copy) and resource (values and formatting) plus the range-to-target semantics, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like write_range or format_range, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the copy/overwrite framing, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives such as write_range (values only) or format_range (formatting only). The 'overwriting the destination' clause is the closest thing to guidance an agent gets.

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