Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vish288

mcp-coda

by vish288
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Coda Push Button

coda_push_button

Triggers a button in a Coda table row to run its configured automation or row modification, returning a request ID for async mutation tracking.

Instructions

Push a button in a Coda table row.

Triggers the button's configured action (e.g. run automation, modify row). The button must be in a Button-type column. The effect depends on the button's configuration in the Coda doc. Returns a requestId for async mutation tracking.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doc_idYesThe doc ID containing the table
row_id_or_nameYesRow ID or name containing the button
table_id_or_nameYesTable ID or name
column_id_or_nameYesColumn ID or name of the button column

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a mutating, open-world operation, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: the effect is non-deterministic and depends on the button's doc configuration, and the call returns a requestId for async mutation tracking. It does not mention permissions or error modes, but the async/non-deterministic disclosure is substantial.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then constraints, then return behavior — a sensible ordering with little waste. The second sentence ('The effect depends on the button's configuration') partially restates the parenthetical about the configured action, costing a point.

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 correctly compensates by naming the returned requestId and its async purpose, and it states the column-type precondition. It misses the obvious next step for the agent — that requestId is consumed by the sibling coda_get_mutation_status — so polling guidance is absent.

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%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds one constraint relevant to column_id_or_name (it must reference a Button-type column), but otherwise contributes no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Push a button in a Coda table row') and explains what it causes ('triggers the button's configured action'). It is distinguishable from the many read/list siblings, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the adjacent coda_trigger_automation.

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?

Provides a real precondition ('The button must be in a Button-type column'), which tells the agent when the call is valid. However, it offers no guidance on when to prefer this over coda_trigger_automation or what to do when the target column is not a button column.

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