tolgee-mcp

by ytarfa

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

create_language

Add a new language to a Tolgee project by specifying project ID, language name, and BCP 47 tag.

Instructions

Add a new language to a Tolgee project.

Args:
    project_id: The numeric ID of the project.
    name: Display name of the language (e.g., "French").
    tag: BCP 47 language tag (e.g., "fr", "de", "ja").

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "tag": "<tag>"
    },
    "name": "create_language"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_id`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`tag`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states the action without disclosing side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or required permissions. Minimal transparency.

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?

Short and to the point: one-line summary plus concise argument descriptions. Front-loaded. Could improve structure with clearer separation but efficient.

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?

Covers purpose and parameters, but lacks info on conflict behavior, validation, or differentiation from update_language. Given output schema exists, return value explanation is unnecessary, but completeness is still moderate.

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?

Schema has 0% coverage, but description explains each parameter: project_id as numeric ID, name as display name, tag as BCP 47 tag (with examples). Adds meaningful context beyond the schema's type/name.

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 action ('Add a new language') and the resource ('to a Tolgee project'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_key or create_project because it specifically targets language 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_language) or prerequisites (e.g., project must exist). Implies usage but lacks explicit when-to or when-not-to context.

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