Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Google Sheets

MCP Google Sheets

by toantran201
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get Spreadsheet Info

get_spreadsheet_info
Read-only

Retrieve metadata including title, sheet names, IDs, and dimensions from a Google Spreadsheet by providing its URL or ID.

Instructions

Returns metadata about a spreadsheet: title, sheet names, IDs, and dimensions.

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": "<spreadsheet>"
    },
    "name": "get_spreadsheet_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spreadsheetYesTarget spreadsheet: a full Google Sheets URL (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/<ID>/edit...) or a bare spreadsheet ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context about the returned metadata content (title, sheet names, IDs, dimensions) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication needs or rate limits. It does not contradict annotations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys all necessary information without redundancy. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool and the presence of annotations and sibling tool names, the description sufficiently covers the return values. However, it lacks details on error handling or authentication scope, which are minor omissions.

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% with a single parameter described as 'Target spreadsheet: a full Google Sheets URL or a bare spreadsheet ID.' The tool description adds no further meaning to the parameter 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 tool returns metadata about a spreadsheet, listing specific items like title, sheet names, IDs, and dimensions. This verb+resource structure distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sheet_data and get_sheet_schema.

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 metadata retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_sheet_data or get_sheet_schema. No exclusions or usage context are provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools