Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Excel MCP Server

Excel MCP Server

by haris-musa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Export workbook

export_workbook
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return an Excel workbook file as an embedded base64 resource, enabling remote servers to access and process workbook contents.

Instructions

Return the workbook file as an embedded base64 resource (remote servers).

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "export_workbook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Removed value: -"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."
    • removedInput schema / properties / path / title
      Removed value: -"Path"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"export_workbookArguments"
  2. Addedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3/5.0
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, so safety is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact not in the structured data: the workbook is returned as an embedded base64 resource rather than a path or stream. It says nothing about payload size limits, failure modes, or why this is restricted to remote servers.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence, front-loaded, with no filler or repetition of the title. It is tight, though the terseness is partly under-specification rather than economy.

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?

For a low-complexity single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description does cover the return shape (base64 embedded resource), which is the main thing an agent needs. It still leaves the required 'path' argument and the remote-server restriction unexplained, so it is only minimally complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter 'path' is completely undocumented in both places. It is ambiguous whether 'path' is the source workbook path, the destination file path, or something server-relative, and the description does nothing to resolve that for a required argument.

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 action (return the workbook file) and the mechanism (embedded base64 resource), which clearly separates it from siblings like import_workbook, create_workbook and list_workbooks. The "(remote servers)" qualifier narrows scope but is left unexplained, and the verb 'export' in the name vs 'return' in the description is slightly loose.

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?

There is no statement of when to prefer this tool, what its prerequisites are, or how it relates to import_workbook. The only usage signal is the parenthetical '(remote servers)', which implies a deployment condition but never says what to do when that condition does not hold.

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