Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Excel MCP Server

Excel MCP Server

by zhiwei5576
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

readDataBySheetName

Retrieve data from a named sheet in an Excel file, with options to set header row and data start row.

Instructions

Get data from a specific sheet in the Excel file

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": {
      "fileAbsolutePath": "<fileAbsolutePath>",
      "sheetName": "<sheetName>"
    },
    "name": "readDataBySheetName"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileAbsolutePathYesThe absolute path of the Excel file
sheetNameYestThe name of the sheet to read
headerRowNotThe row number to use as field names (default: 1)
dataStartRowNoThe row number to start reading data from (default: 2)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Get data' without disclosing behaviors like whether the data includes headers, row ranges, or formatting. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's effects.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is appropriately short, though could include more context without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (read data from a sheet) and full schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits details about return values (no output schema) and usage context, leaving some gaps.

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 each parameter has a description. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score.

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?

The description 'Get data from a specific sheet in the Excel file' clearly indicates the action (get data) and resource (specific sheet). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like readSheetData or readSheetNames, which may have overlapping functionality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as readSheetData or readSheetNames. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context cues for appropriate usage.

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