Causal Decision Agent

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

synth_to_excel

Read-only

Export fitted synthetic-control results to a multi-sheet Excel workbook, preserving diagnostics, coefficients, and next-step guidance for reproducible decision audits.

Instructions

Multi-sheet Excel workbook for synthetic-control results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`obj`	Yes	Object to export.
`path`	Yes	Destination ``.xlsx`` file path.
`detail`	No	Payload depth: 'minimal' (~150 tokens) for sub-step calls where only the point estimate is needed; 'standard' (~1K tokens) for diagnostics + coefficient table; 'agent' (~2K tokens, default) adds violations / next_steps / suggested_functions so the LLM can plan its next call without another round-trip.	agent
`digits`	No	Rounding for floating-point values.
`as_handle`	No	If true, cache the fitted result on the server and return result_id + result_uri alongside the JSON payload so a subsequent tools/call can chain without re-running.
`data_path`	No	Absolute path or URL to a data file. Supported: .csv / .tsv / .txt (delimited), .parquet / .pq, .feather / .arrow, .xlsx / .xls, .dta (Stata), .json / .jsonl. Schemes: file://, s3://, gs://, https://.
`result_id`	No	Optional handle to a previously-fitted result (returned by an earlier call when as_handle=true). Tools that operate on a fitted object accept this in place of re-supplying data_path + columns.
`data_columns`	No	Optional column projection. Parquet/Feather/Stata loaders honour this for fast partial reads.
`method_names`	No	Override sheet / column labels.
`data_sample_n`	No	Optional uniform random subsample size (seed=0, deterministic) — useful on huge panels.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description provides no behavioral context beyond the annotations. It doesn't disclose that the tool writes to the destination path, whether existing files are overwritten, or any side effects. The readOnlyHint=true annotation is not contradicted by the description, but the description also doesn't reconcile the apparent tension between 'read-only' and writing a file to a path.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence and is not bloated, but it is under-specified as a noun phrase. It front-loads the output type but sacrifices action clarity, making it less effective than a concise verb-led description.

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?

The tool has 10 parameters, including an unusual 'detail' payload-depth parameter, and an output schema, but the description is only a fragment. It doesn't explain what sheets are produced, what 'obj' represents, or when to choose this tool over related synth-export tools. The schema and output schema compensate for return-value details, but not for the missing usage and behavior context.

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 100%, so all ten parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but because the schema is complete, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description is a noun phrase ('Multi-sheet Excel workbook for synthetic-control results') that describes the output artifact rather than stating an action. It implies the tool creates/exports an Excel workbook but lacks an explicit verb such as 'exports' or 'writes'. It is not a tautology and the format (Excel) hints at differentiation from synth_to_latex/markdown, but it doesn't clearly distinguish from other file-export siblings like synth_report_to_file.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it writes to a specified .xlsx path, nor does it compare against synth_to_latex, synth_to_markdown, or synth_report_to_file. An agent is left to infer usage from the name and schema.

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

Deploy Server