office_docs_mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

excel_search

Find specific text or values in Excel worksheets. Search across all sheets or a selected sheet, with optional case-sensitive matching and a limit on returned results.

Instructions

Search for a text query across Excel worksheet cells.

Args:
    file_path: Absolute or relative path to the Excel file.
    query: Text to search for.
    sheet_name: Specific sheet name to search in (searches all sheets if omitted).
    case_sensitive: Whether matching is case-sensitive (default: False).
    max_results: Maximum results to return (default: 50).

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": {
      "file_path": "<file_path>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "excel_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes
`file_path`	Yes
`sheet_name`	No
`max_results`	No
`case_sensitive`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no matches are found, how results are formatted, or any side effects. The description only lists parameters and defaults, which are already in the schema. It fails to inform the agent about the nature and behavior of the search operation.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured. It starts with a clear purpose sentence followed by a simple list of parameters. It is not verbose and avoids unnecessary detail. The layout makes key information scannable.

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?

The description covers the parameters but does not explain when to use the tool relative to siblings, nor does it mention expected output or edge cases. While an output schema exists (as per context), the description still lacks usage guidance and behavioral context. For a search tool with five parameters, the description is minimally adequate but not fully complete for an agent to select and invoke it correctly in all scenarios.

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?

The description adds some semantic value beyond the schema: it clarifies that sheet_name 'searches all sheets if omitted' and that file_path is 'Absolute or relative path'. These details are not in the schema properties (which only have types and defaults). However, the schema coverage is 0%, meaning the description should compensate more, and it only provides minimal clarifications for two of the five parameters. The overall contribution is limited.

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 states a specific action (search) and resource (Excel worksheet cells), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools in Word and PowerPoint by explicitly saying Excel. Even without naming a sibling, the resource and action are unambiguous.

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 searching text in Excel files, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like excel_read_sheet or excel_get_metadata. There is no mention of when not to use it or what conditions would make another tool more appropriate. The guidance is inferred from the purpose, not clearly stated.

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