odoo_unlink

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the operation is IRREVERSIBLE, there is no trash/recycle bin, and a bulk confirmation is required beyond 50 records. These are critical safety traits for a destructive operation, making the description highly transparent.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences that immediately convey the most important warning (irreversibility) and then provide additional context. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 the destructive nature of the tool and the absence of annotations, the description covers the essential risks (irreversibility, no trash, bulk threshold) and suggests a safer alternative. It does not detail return values, but output schema is present, so that need is covered. It is fairly complete for a deletion tool, though it could mention permissions or side effects.

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 zero description coverage (0%), so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It only clarifies the `confirm_bulk` parameter's behavior (required beyond 50 records), but does not explain `model` or `ids`. While these may be inferred from context, the lack of explicit definitions leaves a significant gap for a low-coverage schema.

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: 'Supprimer definitivement' (delete definitively), indicating it permanently deletes Odoo records. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like odoo_write (update) and odoo_archive by explicitly noting that archiving is often preferable, which implies this tool is for permanent deletion.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: it warns that archiving ({"active":false}) is often preferable, and it specifies that deletions beyond 50 records require the `confirm_bulk` parameter. This gives clear context for safe usage and alternative approaches.

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