mistral_set_language

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

It discloses a critical side effect: setting a non-English language automatically disables timestamps due to a Mistral API constraint. This goes beyond annotations and provides valuable behavioral context for the agent.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by relevant constraints. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant information.

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 is simple with one well-documented parameter, and the description covers the key caveat about timestamp mutual exclusivity. An output schema exists, so return values don't need explanation. This is complete for practical use.

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?

The schema fully describes the parameter with examples and ISO code formats (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add more. It adds context about the default English language but doesn't augment the parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 tool 'Set the transcription language' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from the sibling getter 'mistral_get_language'. It also provides essential context about the default English setting.

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?

The description explains the default behavior and the important constraint that non-English disables timestamps, which guides usage. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives beyond the implicit set/get distinction.

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