SheetForge MCP

by iHeldan

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

union_tables

Read-only

Combine matching worksheet or table data from multiple Excel workbook files into one dataset for cross-file analysis.

Instructions

Union comparable worksheet or table data across multiple workbook files.

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": {
      "filepaths": "<filepaths>"
    },
    "name": "union_tables"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`select`	No
`sort_by`	No
`row_mode`	No	arrays
`dedupe_on`	No
`filepaths`	Yes
`sort_desc`	No
`header_row`	No
`sheet_name`	No
`table_name`	No
`schema_mode`	No	strict
`infer_schema`	No
`source_sample_limit`	No
`include_source_columns`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.14.0Oct 31, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / filepaths / items / description

Added value: +"Reuse supplied server path; NEVER prepend client cwd. Rooted: relative OK; unrooted stdio: absolute, ask if missing."

First observedv0.8.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to cover safety. However, it says nothing about important behavior for a 14-parameter operation: strict versus inferred schema handling, what happens when source schemas differ, or how deduplication and error cases behave.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is structurally efficient, though its brevity leaves substantial gaps that are penalized elsewhere.

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 complex 14-parameter tool with no output schema, this description is far too sparse. It does not explain how schema alignment works, what 'comparable' means in practice, or how the many options affect the result.

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 effectively 0%, and the description explains none of the 14 parameters. It vaguely implies file inputs and worksheet/table sources, but gives no meaning for limit, select, sort_by, row_mode, dedupe_on, schema_mode, infer_schema, header_row, or include_source_columns.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Union') and resource ('worksheet or table data across multiple workbook files'), making the core operation clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as cross_workbook_lookup or aggregate_table, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives. An agent cannot tell from this text when unioning is preferable to cross_workbook_lookup, query_table, or aggregate_table.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server