odoo_crm_list_leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'Lista' clearly indicates a read-only operation, so there is no hidden mutation risk. However, the description does not mention any additional behavioral traits such as field selection, sorting, or potential limits of the listing beyond the explicit 'limit' parameter, leaving the agent to assume default behavior.

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 compact and well-structured: one opening sentence states the purpose, followed by a bullet-like 'Args' block that lists each parameter with its meaning. Every sentence contributes useful information, there is no filler, and the content is front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

The tool is a simple listing operation with all four parameters documented, an output schema present to describe return values, and no annotations needed for safety because the intent is obviously read-only. The only minor gap is the absence of any statement about default ordering or implicit filters, but the description is otherwise complete for effective invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description fully compensates by explaining each parameter with a concise line: stage by stage name with examples, salesperson by assigned seller name, only_opportunities as a boolean filter, and limit as max records with default. This gives the agent enough semantic information to set each argument correctly without opening the 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 verb ('Lista') and the resource ('leads/oportunidades de CRM (crm.lead) en Odoo'), so an agent can tell this is a listing operation. The sibling tools include create/update lead operations and other list tools, but the description makes the target resource unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling list tools, but that is not critical for purpose identification.

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 implies usage: call this tool to retrieve CRM leads or opportunities. It provides no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of related tools like odoo_crm_create_lead or odoo_crm_update_lead, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The context is reasonably clear but entirely inferred from the verb and resource.

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