Skip to main content
Glama

mistral

by io.usefulapi

Create an agent

mistral_create_agent
Destructive

Creates a Mistral Agent (additive configuration). Management API: POST /v1/agents. Requires model and name; instructions, tools, completion_args, description and handoffs are optional.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesHuman-readable agent name.
modelYesModel powering the agent, e.g. mistral-large-latest.
toolsNoTools available to the agent (passthrough objects, e.g. {type:'web_search'}).
handoffsNoAgent ids this agent may hand off to.
descriptionNoFree-text description of the agent.
instructionsNoSystem instruction prompt the agent follows.
completion_argsNoCompletion arguments (temperature, top_p, etc.) as a passthrough object.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, indicating mutation. The description adds only 'additive configuration' but lacks explicit warnings about irreversibility, permissions, or side effects. It does not sufficiently expand beyond the annotation.

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?

The description is brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently conveys the operation and required vs optional parameters, though it could omit minor redundancy.

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?

For a creation tool with 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description lacks context about return values, error possibilities, or what 'additive configuration' implies. It is incomplete for effective tool selection.

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 description's listing of parameter names adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it creates a Mistral Agent and specifies it's a POST to Management API. The resource and verb are precise, and it distinguishes from sibling tools (list, get, delete) as the only creation tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description lists required (model, name) and optional fields, providing minimal usage hints. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as updating an existing agent (no sibling update tool exists), nor does it mention prerequisites or context.

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

All mistral toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action (e.g., cancel batch job, create agent, delete file, list agents) with no functional overlap. The descriptions clearly differentiate the purposes.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the consistent 'mistral_verb_noun' pattern, with verbs like cancel, create, delete, get, list. The singular/plural noun usage is standard and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools is well-scoped for a management API covering agents, batch jobs, files, libraries, and models. It is neither too few nor too many for the apparent domain.

Completeness3/5

The tool set provides basic read and some write operations, but lacks updates for agents and libraries, and does not allow creating batch jobs or libraries. This creates notable gaps for full lifecycle management.

Resources