Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Excel MCP Server

Excel MCP Server

by mort-lab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

read_cell

Read a cell value from an Excel workbook by providing the workbook's file path, sheet name, and cell reference (e.g., A1).

Instructions

Read a value from a specific cell.

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>",
      "cell": "<cell>"
    },
    "name": "read_cell"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workbook_pathYesPath to the Excel workbook
sheet_nameYesName of the worksheet
cellYesCell reference (e.g., 'A1', 'B10')

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states the obvious (reads a value) without disclosing behavior for empty cells, formulas, or potential errors.

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?

A single sentence of 8 words is extremely concise and front-loads the purpose with no wasted words.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. However, for a simple tool in a large set of siblings, the description could include brief usage notes for edge cases.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 'Read a value from a specific cell' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like 'read_range' and 'write_cell'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'read_range' or 'write_cell' is provided. The description lacks explicit context for usage decisions.

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