odoo_journal_chapter

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral info. It adds one useful detail: `pourquoi` is a business justification carried as-is into the report. However, it does not disclose what happens on invocation, side effects, or prerequisites, leaving the tool's behavior largely opaque.

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 brief and easy to scan, with no irrelevant content. However, its brevity under-specifies the tool, making it less of a well-structured concise description and more of a minimal placeholder.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to provide context needed for tool selection: no action, no usage scenario, no prerequisites or effects. For a tool with no annotations, this level of vagueness is critically incomplete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains `pourquoi` as a business justification used verbatim in the report, which adds useful semantics. But `nom` is left entirely to its schema title, providing no additional meaning beyond a generic 'name'.

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 defines a 'chapter' as a work step in the journal but never states the action the tool performs (e.g., create, add). It reads as a restatement of the tool name rather than a clear functional verb+resource specification.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like odoo_journal_start or odoo_journal_note. The phrase 'les operations suivantes y sont rattachees' implies grouping but does not clarify the intended usage context or exclusions.

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