odoo_project_list_tasks

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose filter semantics and the default limit, which is useful. However, it does not mention whether the operation is strictly read-only, how results are ordered, whether archived or inactive tasks are included, or what happens when no filters are provided.

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 opens with a concise one-line purpose and then lists parameters in a compact structured format. Every line adds value, and the examples for stage ('In Progress', 'Done') improve clarity without bloat.

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 there is an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers all input parameters and the default limit. It is slightly incomplete regarding default behavior when no filters are supplied and regarding ordering or visibility of archived tasks, but these are minor gaps for a straightforward list operation.

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%, and the description compensates fully by defining every parameter: project_id is an exact ID, project_name is a partial-search alternative, assignee is the responsible person's name, stage references a Kanban column, and limit caps results at 30. This is far beyond the raw schema and gives practical meaning for each argument.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lista tareas (project.task) de Odoo, opcionalmente filtradas.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and the underlying model. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings, though the model and action are distinct enough from odoo_project_list_projects and odoo_project_update_task.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as odoo_project_list_projects or odoo_project_update_task. The description only says tasks are optionally filtered; it does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios that favor this tool over others.

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