Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SheetForge MCP

SheetForge MCP

by iHeldan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

create_named_range

Destructive

Create workbook-level or sheet-scoped named ranges to label cell references, making formulas easier to read and maintain.

Instructions

Create a workbook-level or sheet-scoped named range.

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>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "range_ref": "<range_ref>"
    },
    "name": "create_named_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
hiddenNo
dry_runNo
replaceNo
filepathYesReuse supplied server path; NEVER prepend client cwd. Rooted: relative OK; unrooted stdio: absolute, ask if missing.
range_refYes
sheet_nameNo
scope_sheetNo

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

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true; the description doesn't explain why creation is destructive or what gets destroyed (e.g., an existing range with the same name), nor does it mention the replace, hidden, or dry_run behaviors. The scope wording adds a little context about name visibility/conflicts, but the heavy behavioral burden for an 8-parameter mutation tool is largely unmet.

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 it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise given the tool's parameter surface. Nothing is wasted, yet very little is said.

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?

For an 8-parameter, destructive-annotated mutation tool with 13% schema coverage and no output schema, the description should at minimum explain overwrite/replace behavior, scope semantics, and dry_run. Almost all of that is absent.

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 coverage is 13% — only filepath is documented in the schema. The description gestures at scope via 'workbook-level or sheet-scoped' but never clarifies how sheet_name and scope_sheet differ, nor what replace, hidden, or dry_run do. With seven undocumented parameters, the description does not 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 and resource ('Create ... named range') and adds a meaningful scope distinction (workbook-level vs sheet-scoped) that an agent couldn't infer from the name alone. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like list_named_ranges, inspect_named_range, or delete_named_range, but the create semantics are unambiguous.

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 the other named-range tools, no mention of prerequisites such as whether the workbook must be open/saved, and no explanation of when to prefer sheet-scoped over workbook-level scope. The agent must infer everything from the tool name.

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