Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DrissionPage-MCP

DrissionPage-MCP

by hooplus1ce
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

批量读取单元格

vtable_read_cells
Read-only

Read cell values from a specified rectangular region in a VTable, returning them as a row-major matrix (up to 2000 cells).

Instructions

批量读取 VTable 矩形区域的单元格值（行优先矩阵，最多 2000 格）。

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": {
      "col0": "<col0>",
      "row0": "<row0>",
      "col1": "<col1>",
      "row1": "<row1>"
    },
    "name": "vtable_read_cells"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
col0Yes
col1Yes
row0Yes
row1Yes
tab_idNo
table_indexNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only; the description adds useful constraints (max 2000 cells, row-major order) and confirms no side effects. This provides additional behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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?

Single, concise sentence with no redundancy. It captures the core purpose and key constraints efficiently.

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?

Covers main purpose, scope (region), limit, and data structure. Does not detail every parameter, but given the output schema exists and common VTable context, it is sufficient for typical use.

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 lacks parameter descriptions; the description clarifies that col0/row0 and col1/row1 define a rectangular region and mentions row-major order, but does not explain tab_id/table_index. Partial compensation for missing schema details.

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 it reads cell values from a rectangular region of a VTable, specifying row-major matrix and a maximum of 2000 cells. This distinguishes it from single-cell reads like vtable_cell_text or vtable_get_selection.

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 usage for batch reading but does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when to prefer this over alternatives. An agent can infer based on the action, but there's no direct guidance.

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