mistral_list_librariesList RAG document libraries you own or that have been shared with you. Management API: GET /v1/libraries.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Deprecated offset page (use page_token). Default 0. | |
| search | No | Case-insensitive search on the library name. | |
| page_size | No | Libraries per page (1-100). Default 100. | |
| page_token | No | Continuation cursor from a previous response's next_page_token. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the ownership and sharing scope. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, result limits, or other operational traits beyond what annotations provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence that captures the core purpose. It includes the API endpoint as a hint. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be more structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema. The description does not explain the return format, pagination details, or what happens when no libraries exist. Given the complexity (4 optional params), the description is minimally sufficient but not complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents each parameter. The description does not add any extra meaning or usage context for the parameters (e.g., how page_token interacts with search).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'RAG document libraries' with scope 'you own or that have been shared with you'. This distinguishes it from siblings like mistral_get_library (single library) and mistral_list_library_documents (documents within a library).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like mistral_get_library or mistral_list_library_documents. The description implies use for listing owned/shared libraries but does not set exclusion criteria or mention alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (e.g., cancel batch job, create agent, delete file, list agents) with no functional overlap. The descriptions clearly differentiate the purposes.
All tools follow the consistent 'mistral_verb_noun' pattern, with verbs like cancel, create, delete, get, list. The singular/plural noun usage is standard and predictable.
15 tools is well-scoped for a management API covering agents, batch jobs, files, libraries, and models. It is neither too few nor too many for the apparent domain.
The tool set provides basic read and some write operations, but lacks updates for agents and libraries, and does not allow creating batch jobs or libraries. This creates notable gaps for full lifecycle management.