mistral_get_fileRetrieve details about a specific file by its file ID through the Mistral AI API, returning file metadata such as name, size, and purpose.
Get details about a specific file.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| file_id | Yes | File ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond repeating the read operation, such as error conditions, auth requirements, or output characteristics.
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?
A single short sentence with no filler and the purpose front-loaded. It is efficient, though extremely terse even for a simple getter.
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?
For a simple single-parameter getter with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is sufficient to invoke correctly. It leaves minor gaps, such as what "details" are returned and how this differs from download_file or get_signed_url.
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 description coverage is 100% with file_id documented as "File ID." The description phrase "specific file" only minimally reinforces the parameter and adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb ("Get") and resource ("details about a specific file"), and "specific file" implies single-resource retrieval rather than listing. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from siblings like mistral_download_file, mistral_get_signed_url, or mistral_list_files.
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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The agent must infer appropriate usage from the tool name and sibling set alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.