office_docs_mcp

by wkqco33

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

excel_append_rows

Append one or more rows to the end of an Excel sheet, with optional backup of the original file before modifying.

Instructions

Append one or more rows to the end of an Excel sheet.

Args:
    file_path: Path to the Excel file.
    sheet_name: Target sheet name.
    rows: List of rows (each row being a list of cell values).
    backup: If True, create a backup of the original file before modifying.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rows`	Yes
`backup`	No
`file_path`	Yes
`sheet_name`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutating nature of the operation and documents the optional backup behavior, which is useful. However, it does not mention side effects such as whether the file is modified in place, whether the sheet must already exist, or what happens if the sheet is missing.

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 appropriately sized: one purpose sentence followed by compact argument explanations. It is front-loaded with the tool's core function and contains no filler or redundant information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a mutating file operation with no annotations, the description is adequate but not complete. It covers the main parameters and backup option, but it omits important operational context such as how it relates to other Excel write tools and what happens when the target file or sheet does not exist.

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%, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains all four parameters, and it adds necessary detail for 'rows' by clarifying that each row is a list of cell values and for 'backup' by stating its behavioral effect.

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 begins with a specific verb and object: 'Append one or more rows to the end of an Excel sheet.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like excel_write_cell or excel_write_range, which write to arbitrary positions rather than appending.

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 phrase 'append to the end' implies the natural use case, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over excel_write_range, excel_write_cell, or excel_manage_sheets. There are no stated exclusions or alternative conditions.

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