Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SheetForge MCP

SheetForge MCP

by iHeldan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

remove_conditional_format_rules

Destructive

Remove conditional formatting rules from a worksheet by index or clear only broken rules, with optional dry-run preview to verify cleanup before saving.

Instructions

Remove worksheet conditional formatting rules by index or remove all broken ones.

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>",
      "sheet_name": "<sheet_name>"
    },
    "name": "remove_conditional_format_rules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNo
filepathYesReuse supplied server path; NEVER prepend client cwd. Rooted: relative OK; unrooted stdio: absolute, ask if missing.
sheet_nameYes
broken_onlyNo
rule_indexesNo

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

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is carried by structured data. The description adds the two removal scopes, but leaves the most important behavioral question unanswered: what happens when neither rule_indexes nor broken_only is set — does it wipe all rules on the sheet? Dry-run behavior is also undisclosed.

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?

A single compact sentence with the action and both selection modes front-loaded; nothing wasted, but the compression is partly under-specification rather than density.

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?

A destructive, multi-param mutation tool with no output schema and thin parameter documentation needs more: the default/omitted-parameter behavior, the dry_run flag, and whether indexes refer to the order returned by inspect_conditional_format_rules are all 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 coverage is only 20%, and the description semantically maps to just two params ('by index' -> rule_indexes, 'broken ones' -> broken_only). It says nothing about dry_run or sheet_name/filepath handling, and nothing about whether the two selectors combine or conflict.

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 ('Remove worksheet conditional formatting rules') plus the two selection modes (by index / broken only). It is clearly distinguishable from the read-side sibling inspect_conditional_format_rules, though that contrast is not made explicit.

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 two modes imply when each applies ('by index' vs 'remove all broken ones'), but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over inspect_conditional_format_rules first, no prerequisites, and no mention of when to use dry_run before a destructive removal.

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