odoo_call_method

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions that 'ids may be empty for @api.model methods' which is a helpful nuance, but it fails to disclose the potential for arbitrary side effects (writes, deletions) or what the return value looks like. As a 'universal escape hatch,' it should warn about the power and risks, especially since it can call ANY method.

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 four short sentences with a clear front-loaded purpose and concrete examples. No filler or repetition; every sentence adds useful information, making it easy to scan and understand.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 5 parameters, the description is incomplete. It omits any guidance on what the method call returns (e.g., a dict, boolean, record IDs), how errors are surfaced, or whether authentication/privileges are needed. The generic 'any method' nature demands more cautionary context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the first three parameters via examples (model, method, ids) and the empty-id case, but it says nothing about 'args' and 'kwargs' or how they map to positional/keyword arguments. This is partial compensation but leaves key parameters underspecified.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Call ANY method on an Odoo model -- the universal escape hatch.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools that wrap specific operations, and examples like odoo_call_method("account.move", "button_draft", [123]) make the scope concrete.

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 description explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use this for workflow actions the dedicated tools don't wrap yet.' This provides clear direction relative to the many sibling tools, implying dedicated tools should be preferred for their specific cases.

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