xlsx-tools-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

merge_cells

Merge a rectangular range of cells into one in an Excel .xlsx file. Specify the sheet and A1-style range to combine data.

Instructions

Merge a rectangular range of cells into one.

Args: path: Path to the .xlsx file, or the name of a preloaded file. Omit if only one file is configured. sheet: Sheet name. cell_range: A1-style range, e.g. "A1:C1".

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No
`sheet`	Yes
`backup`	No
`cell_range`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Oct 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / backup

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

First observedv0.1.0Aug 17, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Merge' implies a mutation, but the description never says the file is modified, whether the operation is reversible, whether it requires a backup, or what happens to the non-anchor cell values. It also omits the undisclosed 'backup' parameter entirely.

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 one-line purpose is front-loaded and the Args block is compact and scannable. Slight inefficiency in leaving an undocumented parameter, but no wasted prose.

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 need not be explained. Still, for a destructive document mutation with no annotations, the description should disclose at least the file-modification side effect and the meaning of the backup flag; those omissions leave the definition incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents path (including the 'omit if only one file is configured' nuance), sheet, and cell_range with a concrete A1-style example, which is genuinely useful. However, the fourth parameter, backup, is completely undocumented, and no format details beyond the single example are given.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource: merges a rectangular range into one cell. An agent can immediately distinguish it from read_sheet or write_cells. It does not explicitly contrast with unmerge_cells, its obvious inverse sibling, but the operation is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus siblings such as unmerge_cells, set_cell_style, or clear_range. Nothing about prerequisites (e.g., a range must contain more than one cell) or what happens if the range is already merged. The only context is the parameter list.

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