Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SheetForge MCP

SheetForge MCP

by iHeldan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

remove_data_validation_rules

Destructive

Delete specific worksheet data validation rules by index, or clear all broken rules only, to clean up Excel sheets without needing Excel installed.

Instructions

Remove worksheet data validation 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_data_validation_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?

The destructiveHint=true annotation already carries the safety profile, and the description adds the useful scoping detail that removal can be limited to broken rules. However, it never mentions the dry_run parameter, which is the main reversibility/preview mechanism for a destructive tool, and it does not say what happens to dependent cells or invalid indexes.

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 tight sentence with no filler and the two modes front-loaded. It is efficient, though the one-line form leaves no room for the operational caveats an agent needs.

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 a destructive, 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and 20% schema coverage, the description is thin: dry_run, the interaction between rule_indexes and broken_only, and the result of a failed index are all unaddressed. It does not give an agent enough to call it safely.

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% (only filepath is documented), so the description must compensate. It partially does: 'by index' maps to rule_indexes and 'broken ones' maps to broken_only. But dry_run is entirely unexplained, and nothing clarifies precedence when rule_indexes and broken_only are both supplied.

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 data validation rules') plus the two operating modes (by index, or all broken ones). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like inspect_data_validation_rules and remove_conditional_format_rules by resource, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 usage: pass indexes to target specific rules, or target broken ones. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer inspection first, and the dry_run safety path is never surfaced as a recommended first step.

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