odoo_get_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the safety burden. It discloses critical behaviors: filename is sanitized (only last component, no '../') and existing files are never overwritten. This is useful context beyond a simple 'download' statement, though it omits potential error conditions or permission requirements.

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?

Three sentences convey the main action, id-finding guidance, and two important safety warnings without any unnecessary words. The description is front-loaded with the primary purpose and maintains high information density.

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 simple download tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, how to find the id, filename sanitization, and no-overwrite policy. It does not explain error scenarios or return format, but the output schema handles return values. It is reasonably complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains how to obtain attachment_id via odoo_search with a concrete domain, and the overwrite warning implies that 'path' refers to a directory. However, the 'path' parameter itself is never explicitly defined, leaving some ambiguity about its exact format or default behavior.

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 uses the specific verb 'Telecharger' (download) and names the resource 'piece jointe (ir.attachment)', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like odoo_read or odoo_search. It also explains how to locate the attachment via odoo_search, reinforcing its purpose.

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?

It gives clear context by instructing to find the attachment_id via odoo_search with an example domain, and warns about overwrite behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like odoo_read or odoo_export_file, though the download intent is unmistakable.

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