Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DialectOS

DialectOS

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

manage_dialect_variants

Create dialect-specific variants of a locale file by specifying the source path, target variant (e.g., es-MX), and optional output path.

Instructions

Create dialect-specific variants of a locale 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": {
      "sourcePath": "<sourcePath>",
      "variant": "<variant>"
    },
    "name": "manage_dialect_variants"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
variantYesTarget dialect variant (e.g., es-MX, es-AR, es-CO)
outputPathNoOutput path (optional, defaults to source path)
sourcePathYesPath to the source locale file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states that variants are created, but does not describe whether the operation is destructive, overwrites files, requires specific permissions, or any side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, error handling, or behavioral details. The minimal description leaves significant gaps for a tool with 3 parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters fully. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what is inferred from parameter names and descriptions, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create' and the resource 'dialect-specific variants of a locale file'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like detect_dialect and list_dialects, which focus on detection and listing rather than creation.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or comparison with sibling tools such as batch_translate_locales or translate_text.

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