xlsx-tools-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

append_rows

Append rows after the last used row of a sheet, then optionally recalculate the workbook. Create the sheet first if it doesn't exist.

Instructions

Append rows after the last used row of a sheet, then recalculate the workbook.

Set recalculate=False to skip the LibreOffice recompute (e.g. for structurally complex workbooks you don't want round-tripped).

Args: path: Path to the .xlsx file, or the name of a preloaded file. Omit if only one file is configured. sheet: Sheet name. rows: List of rows, each a list of cell values in column order. create_sheet_if_missing: Create the sheet first if it doesn't exist yet. recalculate: Run the LibreOffice recompute pass after saving.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No
`rows`	Yes
`sheet`	Yes
`backup`	No
`recalculate`	No
`allow_external_formulas`	No
`create_sheet_if_missing`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0Oct 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / allow_external_formulas

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Allow External Formulas",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / backup

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Backup"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Aug 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does meaningfully more than restate the name: it discloses the append position, the automatic LibreOffice recalculate pass, and the cost/risk tradeoff of that recompute step. It does not state whether appends are reversible, whether a backup is auto-taken (the 'backup' param exists but is unmentioned), or what happens on sheet-size overflow – gaps that keep it below 5.

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 core behavior and the recalculate caveat are front-loaded in the first two sentences, followed by an Args block. Every sentence adds information; there is no filler or redundant restatement of the name.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the write/recalculate behavior is covered. But for a mutation tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and two parameters (backup, allow_external_formulas) undocumented in both schema and description, the definition leaves an agent unable to reason about durability and external-reference handling.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and there are 7 parameters, so the description must compensate – and it documents path (including the preloaded-file fallback and omission case), sheet, rows (structurally: list of row-lists in column order), create_sheet_if_missing, and recalculate. That covers the two required params plus key behavior, but silently omits backup and allow_external_formulas, leaving two of seven parameters undocumented anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb ('append rows') plus the exact placement ('after the last used row of a sheet') and names the subsequent side effect ('recalculate the workbook'). That positioning clause cleanly distinguishes it from sibling insert_rows and write_cells, which lack any placement semantics.

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?

The recalculate parameter is framed with a when-to-skip condition ('structurally complex workbooks you don't want round-tripped'), which is real usage guidance. However, it never addresses when to choose append_rows over insert_rows, write_cells, or create_sheet, and doesn't mention preconditions like required file configuration beyond the path note.

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