Skip to main content
Glama
openl-tablets

OpenL MCP Server

Official

Unmerge Table Cells (raw)

openl_unmerge_table_cells
Idempotent

Unmerge merged table cells in raw source by specifying row and column of the merged region, splitting them into individual cells. Works for any table type with 0-based positions.

Instructions

Unmerge the merged cell that covers ('row','column') in a table's raw source, splitting it back into individual cells. Operates on the table's RAW source, so it works for any table type. Positions are 0-based (row 0 is the header row, column 0 carries the leading labels). An edit that relocates the table (it had no room to grow in place) CHANGES its location-derived id; the response always returns the table's CURRENT id as 'tableId' (plus previousTableId when it changed) — use it for subsequent calls. Note: the studio does not auto-compile after an edit; this tool reads the table back to trigger the recompile, so a subsequent openl_project_status reflects the change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowYes0-based row index of any cell in the merged region (0..height-1).
columnYes0-based column index of any cell in the merged region (0..width-1).
tableIdYesTable identifier - unique ID assigned by OpenL Studio (e.g., 'calculatePremium_1234'). VOLATILE: derived from the table's location, so it changes when an edit relocates the table (it had no room to grow in place) — use the 'tableId' returned by the latest openl_update_table/openl_append_table response, or refresh via openl_list_tables().
projectIdYesProject ID returned by backend. Use the exact 'projectId' value from openl_list_projects() response without modification or reformatting.
response_formatNoResponse format: 'json' for structured data, 'markdown' for human-readable (default), 'markdown_concise' for brief summary (1-2 paragraphs), 'markdown_detailed' for full details with contextmarkdown
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate openWorldHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds critical behavioral details: table ID volatility on relocation (with 'previousTableId' tracking), recompile triggering, and the response format. These go beyond annotations and help the agent understand side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single paragraph that is information-dense but not excessive. Every sentence adds value (action, scope, positioning, ID behavior, recompile note). It is front-loaded with the primary action. Minor redundancy could be tightened, but overall efficient.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and complex side effects, the description covers: input meaning (positions, IDs), output behavior (current/previous tableId), lifecycle (relocation, recompile trigger), and effect on studio state. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly and handle responses.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining 0-based positioning (header row = row 0, leading labels = column 0) and notes tableId's volatility. This helps interpret parameter semantics beyond the schema 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 clearly states the action (unmerge merged table cells) and specifies the operand (a table's raw source, any table type). It uses strong verbs ('unmerge', 'split') and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'openl_merge_table_cells' by being its inverse. The details about positions and recompile behavior further clarify purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides usage context, including the effect on table ID when relocation occurs and the recompile trigger. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., when to use this vs other table editing tools) and does not state prerequisites or exclude scenarios. The context is clear but not comprehensive.

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/openl-tablets/openl-mcp'

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