mcp-google-sheets

get_multiple_spreadsheet_summary

Read-only

Retrieve summaries of multiple Google Spreadsheets, including sheet names, headers, and initial data rows, by providing spreadsheet IDs.

Instructions

Get a summary of multiple Google Spreadsheets, including sheet names, headers, and the first few rows of data for each sheet.

Args: spreadsheet_ids: A list of spreadsheet IDs to summarize. rows_to_fetch: The number of rows (including header) to fetch for the summary (default: 5).

Returns: A list of dictionaries, each representing a spreadsheet summary. Includes spreadsheet title, sheet summaries (title, headers, first rows), or an error.

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": {
      "spreadsheet_ids": "<spreadsheet_ids>"
    },
    "name": "get_multiple_spreadsheet_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`spreadsheet_ids`	Yes
`rows_to_fetch`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.2Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description adds context about returning summaries with errors, but does not mention potential performance issues or auth requirements.

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 description is concise, well-structured with purpose, args, and returns clearly separated. Every sentence is necessary and informative.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the output schema exists, the description adequately summarizes return structure. It covers the main functionality, though it could mention handling multiple spreadsheets simultaneously more explicitly.

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%, but the description fully explains both parameters: spreadsheet_ids as a list of IDs and rows_to_fetch with default 5. This adds substantial value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'multiple Google Spreadsheets', and details the content (sheet names, headers, first few rows). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_sheet_data or list_sheets.

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 description implies usage for obtaining a summary of multiple spreadsheets but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_sheet_data or list_sheets.

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