Skip to main content
Glama
kmexnx

Excel to PDF Converter

by kmexnx
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one handles Excel files (.xls, .xlsx) and the other handles Apple Numbers files (.numbers). There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, as they target different file formats within the same conversion domain.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'convert_*_to_pdf', making them predictable and easy to understand. The naming is uniform across the set, with no deviations in style or convention.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a file conversion domain that might include other formats or operations. While it covers two specific formats well, the scope could be expanded to feel more complete, placing it in the borderline range.

    Completeness2/5

    The server is severely incomplete for a file conversion tool, as it only supports two specific formats (Excel and Numbers) without covering other common ones like Word, PowerPoint, or images. This creates significant gaps that will limit agent functionality in broader conversion tasks.

  • Average 3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the conversion action but lacks details on permissions, side effects, rate limits, or output handling. For a file conversion tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency, as it doesn't describe what happens during or after conversion.

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

    Conciseness5/5

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

    The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

    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 the complexity of file conversion (which may involve permissions, errors, or format constraints), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address potential behavioral aspects or output details, leaving gaps that could hinder correct tool invocation by an AI agent.

    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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents both parameters (input_path and output_format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as format details or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

    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 clearly states the tool's purpose: converting Excel files to PDF format, specifying the supported input file types (.xls, .xlsx). It uses a specific verb ('Converts') and identifies the resource (Excel files). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'convert_numbers_to_pdf' beyond the file format mention, which might imply differentiation but isn't explicit.

    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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention the sibling tool 'convert_numbers_to_pdf' or any other conversion tools, nor does it specify prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions for usage. This leaves the agent without clear direction on tool selection.

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

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Converts' implies a transformation operation, it doesn't specify whether this is a read-only conversion or modifies files, what permissions are needed, how errors are handled, or what the output looks like (e.g., file location, format details). The description lacks critical behavioral context for a file conversion tool.

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

    Conciseness5/5

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

    The description is a single, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently specifies the input format (.numbers) and output format (PDF). Every part of the sentence earns its place by conveying essential information without redundancy.

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

    Completeness3/5

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

    Given the tool's moderate complexity (file conversion with 2 parameters) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but omits behavioral details, usage guidelines, and output information. It's complete enough to understand the basic function but leaves significant gaps for effective agent use.

    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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters (input_path and output_format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema—it doesn't explain path requirements, format constraints, or usage examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

    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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Converts') and resource ('Apple Numbers files (.numbers) to PDF format'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling tool 'convert_excel_to_pdf', which handles a different file format but performs a similar conversion function.

    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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention the sibling tool 'convert_excel_to_pdf' or clarify that this tool is specifically for Numbers files, not other spreadsheet formats. There's no context about prerequisites, error conditions, or typical use cases.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

excel-to-pdf-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

excel-to-pdf-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/kmexnx/excel-to-pdf-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server