Skip to main content
Glama

excel_create

Create new Excel spreadsheets directly from AI agents. Generate blank workbooks instantly through native macOS integration with Microsoft Excel.

Instructions

Create a new Excel spreadsheet

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • server.js:64-64 (registration)
    Tool name and description registration in the TOOLS array
    ["excel_create", "Create a new Excel spreadsheet"],
  • server.js:82-86 (registration)
    Tool registration with MCP server - creates stub handler that returns installation message
    for (const [name, desc] of TOOLS) {
      server.tool(name, desc, {}, async () => ({
        content: [{ type: "text", text: "This is an inspection stub. Install Pilot MCP on macOS: npx -y local-mcp@latest setup" }],
      }));
    }
  • File header comments explaining this is a stub server, real implementation is in native macOS binary
    #!/usr/bin/env node
    /**
     * Minimal MCP stub for Glama inspection.
     * Lists all Pilot MCP tools so Glama can detect them.
     * The real server is a native macOS binary.
     */
    const { McpServer } = require("@modelcontextprotocol/sdk/server/mcp.js");
    const { StdioServerTransport } = require("@modelcontextprotocol/sdk/server/stdio.js");
    const { z } = require("zod");
    
    const server = new McpServer({ name: "pilot-mcp", version: "2.2.0" });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet fails to specify critical details: the default save location, naming behavior, whether existing files are overwritten, the return value (file path, object, or boolean), or the file format (.xlsx). It minimally signals a write operation through the verb 'Create' but omits operational specifics.

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?

The description is extremely brief (five words) and front-loaded, but given the complete absence of annotations and output schema, this brevity represents under-specification rather than efficient communication. The single sentence fails to compensate for missing structured metadata.

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?

The description is inadequate for the tool's complexity given the lack of supporting metadata. With no output schema and no annotations, the description should disclose the return value (presumably a file reference or path) and file system behavior, but it provides only the minimal functional label.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema contains zero parameters (empty properties object). Per evaluation guidelines, tools with zero parameters receive a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics to clarify beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 clear action ('Create') and resource ('Excel spreadsheet'), accurately reflecting the tool's function. However, it lacks specificity regarding scope (e.g., blank workbook vs. template) and does not explicitly differentiate from sibling operations like excel_write_cell beyond the implied file-level vs. cell-level distinction.

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 such as excel_write_cell or other file creation tools like word_create. There are no stated prerequisites (e.g., whether a filename is required) or conditions for usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/lanchuske/local-mcp-releases'

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