Coda MCP Server

coda_list_rows

List rows from a Coda table using optional filters, sorting, and pagination. Choose column names or IDs, and value format for results.

Instructions

List rows in a table with optional filtering and sorting

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": {
      "docId": "<docId>",
      "tableIdOrName": "<tableIdOrName>"
    },
    "name": "coda_list_rows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`docId`	Yes	The ID of the document
`tableIdOrName`	Yes	The ID or name of the table
`query`	No	Filter rows by column value, e.g. "Column Name":"value" - optional
`sortBy`	No	Sort order for returned rows - optional
`useColumnNames`	No	Use column names instead of column IDs in the output - defaults to true
`valueFormat`	No	The format that cell values are returned as. 'rich' returns detailed objects for images, people, and references. 'simple' returns plain strings. Defaults to 'rich'.	rich
`limit`	No	The number of rows to return - optional
`nextPageToken`	No	The token needed to get the next page of results, returned from a previous call to this tool - optional

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.7.1May 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It notes optional filtering and sorting but omits pagination (nextPageToken), read-only behavior, or authentication needs. Minimal behavioral context beyond the core operation.

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?

Single sentence, efficient, front-loaded with core action. No wasted words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. Lacks mention of pagination, return format, or row structure, which are essential for effective use.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds 'optional filtering and sorting' which hints at query and sortBy, but does not explain their semantics beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List rows' and resource 'in a table', with optional filtering and sorting. It distinguishes from sibling tools like coda_list_columns and coda_get_row.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies use for listing multiple rows with filters, but does not mention alternatives like get_row for single rows or upsert_rows for modification.

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