Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Excel MCP Server

Excel MCP Server

by mort-lab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

read_range

Read data from a specified range of cells in an Excel workbook. Provide the workbook path, sheet name, and cell range reference to retrieve cell values.

Instructions

Read data from 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>"
    },
    "name": "read_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workbook_pathYesPath to the Excel workbook
sheet_nameYesName of the worksheet
range_refYesRange reference (e.g., 'A1:D10')

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?

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Read data', implying read-only, but does not explicitly confirm safety, permissions, side effects, or return format. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates return format expectations, but other traits are omitted.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. Every word adds value.

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 simple tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details, making it less complete than high-tier examples.

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 coverage is 100% (all three parameters have descriptions in the input schema). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the action ('Read data') and the resource ('a range of cells'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like 'read_cell' (single cell) and 'write_range' (write operation).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or context for selection among similar tools like 'read_cell'.

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