Skip to main content
Glama

get_language

Retrieve the language settings configured for your Gmail account to ensure proper display and localization of the interface.

Instructions

Gets language settings

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'get_language' tool, registered via server.tool. It uses the shared handleTool to authenticate and call Gmail API's users.settings.getLanguage, then formats the response.
    server.tool("get_language",
      "Gets language settings",
      {},
      async () => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.getLanguage({ userId: 'me' })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • src/index.ts:853-862 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_language' tool on the MCP server, including inline schema (empty input) and handler.
    server.tool("get_language",
      "Gets language settings",
      {},
      async () => {
        return handleTool(config, async (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => {
          const { data } = await gmail.users.settings.getLanguage({ userId: 'me' })
          return formatResponse(data)
        })
      }
    )
  • Input schema for 'get_language' tool: no parameters required.
    {},
  • Shared helper function handleTool used by get_language (and other tools) to handle OAuth authentication, create Gmail client, execute the API call, and handle errors.
    const handleTool = async (queryConfig: Record<string, any> | undefined, apiCall: (gmail: gmail_v1.Gmail) => Promise<any>) => {
      try {
        const oauth2Client = queryConfig ? createOAuth2Client(queryConfig) : defaultOAuth2Client
        if (!oauth2Client) throw new Error('OAuth2 client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const credentialsAreValid = await validateCredentials(oauth2Client)
        if (!credentialsAreValid) throw new Error('OAuth2 credentials are invalid, please re-authenticate')
    
        const gmailClient = queryConfig ? google.gmail({ version: 'v1', auth: oauth2Client }) : defaultGmailClient
        if (!gmailClient) throw new Error('Gmail client could not be created, please check your credentials')
    
        const result = await apiCall(gmailClient)
        return result
      } catch (error: any) {
        // Check for specific authentication errors
        if (
          error.message?.includes("invalid_grant") ||
          error.message?.includes("refresh_token") ||
          error.message?.includes("invalid_client") ||
          error.message?.includes("unauthorized_client") ||
          error.code === 401 ||
          error.code === 403
        ) {
          return formatResponse({
            error: `Authentication failed: ${error.message}. Please re-authenticate by running: npx @shinzolabs/gmail-mcp auth`,
          });
        }
    
        return formatResponse({ error: `Tool execution failed: ${error.message}` });
      }
    }
  • Shared helper formatResponse used to wrap API responses in MCP content format.
    const formatResponse = (response: any) => ({ content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response) }] })

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states 'Gets' which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it lacks confirmation of no side effects, authorization needs, or any rate limits. The transparency is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise—only three words—with no redundant information. Every word is necessary, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose. No waste.

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?

For a simple tool with no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, but could be improved by specifying the scope (e.g., current user's language settings). Given the abundance of sibling get tools, more context would help.

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

Parameters4/5

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

There are zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as no parameter documentation is needed.

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?

The description 'Gets language settings' clearly identifies the action (gets) and resource (language settings). It is specific enough to distinguish from other get tools like get_profile or get_vacation, but does not elaborate on which language settings are targeted, which could be ambiguous.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_language, nor does it specify context like prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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