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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: the returned fields (ID, name, email, phone, company), the meaning of an empty result, and the requirement for a Cotlet API key with app access. It stops short of describing pagination behavior beyond the schema's limit/offset.

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

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

Five information-dense sentences with no filler, front-loaded with purpose and ending with the practical empty-result and auth notes. The 'Odoo:' prefix slightly restates the title, but every substantive sentence earns its place.

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

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

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it covers the empty-result case, downstream ID usage, and auth prerequisites. Nothing critical for correctly invoking this read-only search is missing.

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

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents limit, query, offset and is_company; baseline is 3. The description notes company matching in addition to name/email, but the schema's query field only claims name/email, so this adds only marginal and slightly inconsistent meaning.

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

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Search contacts (customers and vendors)') plus the match fields (name, email, company), and distinguishes itself from the sibling odoo_create_contact by describing the empty-result fallback. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and what it does not do.

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

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

Explicitly routes to alternatives: contact_id feeds create_draft_invoice and create_sales_order, and an empty result is the cue to call create_contact. This gives concrete when-to-use and when-to-switch guidance rather than leaving the workflow to inference.

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