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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only the 'single request' efficiency note and a restatement of the return shape, which the output schema already supplies; no mention of pagination behavior or the default 50-record cap's practical effect.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no filler. Every sentence adds information and nothing is repeated unnecessarily.

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 annotations covering safety, a fully described schema, and an output schema explaining the return shape, the description is nearly sufficient. The one remaining gap is routing guidance against odoo_read and odoo_search_count for an agent choosing among them.

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%, with limit, model, order, domain, fields and offset all documented in the schema including examples. The description only echoes 'domain filter', so baseline 3 applies — the schema carries the parameter burden.

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: searches an Odoo model with a domain filter and reads matching records in one request. This is clearly distinguishable from a read-by-id tool or a count-only tool, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

The phrase 'in a single request' implies this is the combined search+read path rather than search-then-read, but no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusion against odoo_read or odoo_search_count is given. Usage must be inferred from the sibling names.

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