Coda MCP Server

coda_push_button

Push a button column on a specific row in a Coda table to trigger automated workflows or actions.

Instructions

Push a button column on a row in a table

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>",
      "rowIdOrName": "<rowIdOrName>",
      "columnIdOrName": "<columnIdOrName>"
    },
    "name": "coda_push_button"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`docId`	Yes	The ID of the document
`tableIdOrName`	Yes	The ID or name of the table
`rowIdOrName`	Yes	The ID or name of the row
`columnIdOrName`	Yes	The ID or name of the button column

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.7.1May 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, or whether the action is asynchronous/destructive.

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 sentence with no fluff, efficiently conveying the core action, though it could be slightly expanded for clarity.

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 the tool has 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what 'pushing' entails, return behavior, or any constraints.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which warrants a baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('push') and resource ('button column on a row in a table'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like coda_update_row or coda_delete_row.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or post-conditions.

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