Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Excel MCP Server

Excel MCP Server

by mort-lab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

format_fill

Apply background color to a range of cells in an Excel worksheet, supporting solid fill and pattern options.

Instructions

Apply background color to a range of cells.

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": {
      "workbook_path": "<workbook_path>",
      "sheet_name": "<sheet_name>",
      "range_ref": "<range_ref>",
      "color": "<color>"
    },
    "name": "format_fill"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workbook_pathYesPath to the Excel workbook
sheet_nameYesName of the worksheet
range_refYesRange to format (e.g., 'A1:B10')
colorYesHex color code (e.g., 'FFFF00' for yellow)
fill_typeNoFill type ('solid' or 'pattern')solid

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'apply background color' without disclosing whether it overwrites existing fills, behavior on merged cells, or reversibility. For a modification tool, this is insufficient.

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 sentence that is accurate and free of fluff. However, it could be slightly expanded to mention the optional fill_type parameter for completeness. Still very concise.

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 simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks behavioral transparency and usage guidance. It does not fully inform an AI agent about potential side effects or prerequisites.

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 description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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?

The description 'Apply background color to a range of cells' clearly states the verb (apply), resource (background color), and scope (range of cells). It effectively distinguishes from sibling formatting tools like format_font or format_border.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like format_font or format_border. The description implies usage for cell background color fill but lacks when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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