MCP Odoo Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination behavior (limit/offset defaults) which is helpful, but doesn't cover important aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation. For a listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns) and uses bullet-like formatting. Every sentence adds value, though the 'List products in Odoo.' opening could be slightly more informative about scope or context. Overall efficient with minimal waste.

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?

Given 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description does an excellent job documenting parameter semantics. The presence of an output schema means the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, for a tool with no annotations, it could better address behavioral aspects like authentication, permissions, or error handling to be fully complete.

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?

The description provides excellent parameter semantics despite 0% schema description coverage. It explains what each parameter does, provides enum values for product_type (consu=Consumable, service=Service, product=Storable), clarifies boolean behavior for 'available', and documents default values for limit and offset. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states 'List products in Odoo' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_product' (singular retrieval) by indicating it returns multiple products, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list_* tools like 'list_contacts' or 'list_employees' which follow similar patterns.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it's clearly for listing products, there's no mention of when to use 'list_products' versus 'get_product' (singular retrieval) or 'search_records' (more flexible searching). The description provides filtering parameters but no contextual guidance about tool selection.

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