erp2pdf-studio-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_translations

Translate Odoo PDF and email templates into multiple languages in one call, validating placeholders, merging or replacing cells, and filling empty entries from a glossary.

Instructions

Translate a template, many languages in one call. translations = {lang: {source string: text}} (lang: de, de_DE, fr_CH...; source strings exactly as get_translations lists them; null deletes a cell). A translation must keep exactly the source's {{ expressions }} and, in an email, its numbered tags <1>...</1>, <2/> (any order, each tag closed after it opens), else nothing is saved and the errors say which. replace=true replaces each language sent as a whole (PUT); default merges (PATCH). fill_from_glossary fills empty cells of the given languages from the built-in glossary. Returns the updated report plus changed and warnings.

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": {
      "template_id": "<template_id>"
    },
    "name": "set_translations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`kind`	No	pdf
`replace`	No
`languages`	No
`template_id`	Yes
`translations`	No
`add_languages`	No
`remove_unused`	No
`source_language`	No
`remove_languages`	No
`fill_from_glossary`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With zero annotations the description carries the full behavioral burden and does much of it: validation rules for {{ expressions }} and numbered email tags, atomic failure semantics ('nothing is saved and the errors say which'), and the merge-vs-replace write model. It omits permission/auth requirements and does not warn that remove_languages/remove_unused delete data.

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?

Front-loads purpose then layers the nested translations format, constraints, and write-mode semantics; nearly every clause carries information. The heavy parenthetical nesting makes it denser than ideal but there is little wasted prose.

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?

Coverage of the hard part (nested translations payload and its validation) is excellent and the return values are described despite no output schema. But for a 10-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, leaving four lifecycle parameters (add/remove languages, remove_unused, source_language) undocumented is a real gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must document all 10 params, but it only meaningfully explains translations, replace, fill_from_glossary, and hints at kind via 'in an email'. source_language, add_languages, remove_languages, remove_unused, languages, and template_id get no explanation anywhere.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: set translations for a template, in bulk across languages. It implicitly contrasts with get_translations by requiring source strings 'exactly as get_translations lists them', but it never explicitly says when to pick this sibling over that one.

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?

Gives actionable mode-selection guidance: replace=true replaces each language wholesale (PUT), default merges (PATCH), and fill_from_glossary fills only empty cells. It also encodes a prerequisite workflow (call get_translations first to obtain source strings), though it offers no explicit 'do not use when' exclusions.

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