Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SheetForge MCP

SheetForge MCP

by iHeldan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

copy_worksheet

Destructive

Duplicate an Excel worksheet with its tables, rules, charts, named ranges, and layout settings to create a new sheet.

Instructions

Copy a worksheet with tables, rules, charts, names, and layout settings.

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": {
      "filepath": "<filepath>",
      "source_sheet": "<source_sheet>",
      "target_sheet": "<target_sheet>"
    },
    "name": "copy_worksheet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filepathYesReuse supplied server path; NEVER prepend client cwd. Rooted: relative OK; unrooted stdio: absolute, ask if missing.
source_sheetYes
target_sheetYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.14.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / filepath / description
      Added value: +"Reuse supplied server path; NEVER prepend client cwd. Rooted: relative OK; unrooted stdio: absolute, ask if missing."
  2. First observedv0.8.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description usefully discloses what content is carried over (tables, rules, charts, names, layout), which goes beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation. However, it never addresses the destructive side: whether an existing target sheet is overwritten, whether the source is consumed, or what happens on name collision — the most important behavioral question for this tool.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, but its brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficiency. For a destructive copy operation with three required parameters, the one-liner is too minimal.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given destructiveHint=true, 3 required params, 33% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: overwrite semantics, target creation behavior, and whether permissions/protected sheets affect the copy. It names what gets copied but not how the operation behaves.

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 only 33% — filepath is well documented in the schema, but source_sheet and target_sheet carry names only. The description adds no meaning about these two parameters, such as whether target_sheet must be a new name or an existing sheet, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (worksheet), and enumerates what is carried over: tables, rules, charts, names, layout settings. It implicitly distinguishes itself from copy_range by scoping to the whole sheet, though it never explicitly contrasts with that sibling.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus copy_range or create_worksheet, and no prerequisites such as whether target_sheet must already exist or whether an existing sheet is overwritten. The agent must infer the usage context entirely.

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