Skip to main content
Glama

main

by dev.lingo

get_i18n_library_docs

Retrieves authoritative documentation for i18n libraries (currently react-intl).

When to Use

Called during i18n_checklist Steps 7-10.

The checklist tool will tell you when you need i18n library documentation. Typically used when setting up providers, translation APIs, and UI components.

If you're implementing i18n: Let the checklist guide you. It will tell you when to fetch library docs

Why This Matters

Different i18n libraries have different APIs and patterns. Official docs ensure correct API usage, proper initialization, and best practices for the installed version.

How to Use

Two-Phase Workflow:

  1. Discovery - Call with action="index"

  2. Reading - Call with action="read" and section_id

Parameters:

  • library: Currently only "react-intl" supported

  • version: Use "latest"

  • action: "index" or "read"

  • section_id: Required for action="read"

Example:

get_i18n_library_docs(library="react-intl", action="index")
get_i18n_library_docs(library="react-intl", action="read", section_id="0:3")

What You Get

  • Index: Available documentation sections

  • Read: Full API references and usage examples

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoindex
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
libraryYes
versionNolatest
section_idNo

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly describes a read-only retrieval pattern with a two-phase workflow (index then read), actions, and expected outputs ('Index: Available documentation sections; Read: Full API references and usage examples'). It does not explicitly say there are no side effects, but the terminology strongly implies a safe read 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 well-structured with clear section headers (When to Use, How to Use, What You Get) and code examples. It is longer than average but each section adds value. Minor redundancy exists in the 'Why This Matters' section, which could be trimmed, but overall it is focused and front-loaded.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a reasonable overall picture of a documentation-retrieval tool. It explains the workflow and results at a high level. However, the invalid examples omitting the required 'context' parameter, combined with the lack of details about the format of section_id or response structure, leave gaps for an agent using the tool on its own.

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 meaningfully explains action, section_id, library, and version semantics beyond the schema, which has only 20% schema_description_coverage. However, it omits the required 'context' parameter from the parameter list and provides examples that omit it, making the example calls technically invalid. This is a notable gap, though it partially compensates for low schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Retrieves authoritative documentation for i18n libraries (currently react-intl).' This immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_framework_docs and get_project_context by focusing on i18n-specific library documentation. The title is null, but the description fully compensates with a clear action and resource.

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?

The 'When to Use' section explicitly anchors usage to i18n_checklist Steps 7-10 and says the checklist will guide the agent. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use alternatives (e.g., get_framework_docs), nor does it contrast with those alternatives. The guidance is contextually strong but lacks an explicit exclusion statement.

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

All main toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: i18n_checklist orchestrates the workflow, get_project_context detects project setup, get_framework_docs fetches framework docs, and get_i18n_library_docs fetches library docs. Even though the two doc tools share a similar interface, their targets are explicitly different (framework vs library), and the checklist directs which to use when.

Naming Consistency4/5

Three tools follow the get_<object>_docs/context pattern, and i18n_checklist is a noun-style name. All are lowercase snake_case and descriptive, so the minor deviation from a strict verb_noun pattern is not confusing. The i18n_ prefix on the checklist also ties it to the server's domain.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is well-scoped for a focused i18n implementation workflow. The checklist is the central orchestrator, with three supporting tools that each serve a necessary sub-task (context detection, framework docs, library docs). No tool feels redundant or missing.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface fully covers the i18n implementation lifecycle: i18n_checklist provides the step-by-step process, get_project_context gathers the required initial context, and the two doc tools supply current reference material. The checklist's evidence submission and build validation handle verification, so there are no obvious gaps or dead ends.

Resources