graph-excel-mcp

insert_rows

Add empty rows above a specified row in an Excel worksheet, shifting existing rows down; preview the change with a dry run and verify blank rows after writing.

Instructions

Insert count empty rows above row; everything from row down shifts down. The dry run shows the row that will move. Verified afterwards: that row is found at row+count and the new rows are empty.

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": {
      "file": "<file>",
      "sheet": "<sheet>",
      "row": "<row>"
    },
    "name": "insert_rows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`row`	Yes
`file`	Yes	Workbook: SharePoint URL, an alias from ~/.graph-excel/workbooks.json, or "driveId:itemId"
`send`	No	false (default) = dry run: shows what would change. true = write — only after the user approved (or a standing rule allows it)
`count`	No
`sheet`	Yes	Worksheet name exactly as listed by resolve

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only give readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true; the description adds the real behavioral payload – that existing content shifts down, that the dry run previews which row moves, and a concrete post-write verification (old row at row+count, new rows empty). It does not cover error cases such as row beyond sheet size, but the side-effect disclosure is well beyond the annotations.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, and the primary effect is front-loaded before the verification detail. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 5-param mutation with no output schema, the description supplies the effect, the dry-run preview and the success check, which is most of what an agent needs. Missing only boundary/error behavior (e.g. row past the last row) and any permission expectations.

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?

Schema coverage is 60% and the description compensates by clarifying the two least self-explanatory params: `row` is the insertion point (above which rows are added) and `count` is how many empty rows are created. `file`, `sheet` and `send` are left to their schema descriptions, which already cover them.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Insert `count` empty rows above `row`') plus the resulting side effect ('everything from `row` down shifts down'). The insert-vs-append distinction from the sibling append_rows is implicit but unambiguous from the positional wording.

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?

Conveys the intended workflow (dry run first, then verify) but never says when to choose this over append_rows or append_update, nor any precondition such as row being within the sheet bounds. Usage is implied by the positional semantics rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server