Skip to main content
Glama

Coda List Formulas

coda_list_formulas
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all named formulas in a Coda doc to retrieve their names, IDs, and values. Use this for doc-level computed values, then fetch a specific formula by ID.

Instructions

List all named formulas in a Coda doc.

Returns formula metadata including name, ID, and value. Named formulas are doc-level computed values (not column formulas). Use coda_get_formula to get a specific formula's current value.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of formulas to return (1-200)
cursorNoPagination cursor from a previous response
doc_idYesThe doc ID to list formulas from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
      -  "properties": {
      -    "result": {
      -      "type": "string"
      -    }
      -  },
      -  "required": [
      -    "result"
      -  ],
      -  "type": "object",
      -  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
      -}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.4.14

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: it defines what a 'named formula' is, notes these are doc-level rather than column-level values, and describes the returned metadata (name, ID, value) in the absence of an output schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then scope clarification, then the alternative tool. No filler and nothing repeated from structured fields.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states the shape of returned metadata and the tool's scope. Pagination semantics are left to the schema's cursor description, which is acceptable, though a note on large docs or paging would make it fully self-sufficient.

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 doc_id, limit (1-200) and cursor are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter meaning such as cursor lifecycle or default page size behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List all named formulas in a Coda doc') and immediately disambiguates scope by clarifying that named formulas are doc-level computed values, not column formulas. An agent can distinguish this from coda_get_formula and the column/table listing tools without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the agent to coda_get_formula 'to get a specific formula's current value,' which is a genuine alternative with a stated selection condition. It does not cover when to prefer other listing tools or how pagination should drive repeat calls, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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