Delete one or more Odoo records permanently using configured user permissions. Provide the model name and record IDs to remove data directly from Odoo.
Permanently delete one or more Odoo records using the configured Odoo user permissions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ids | Yes | ||
| model | Yes | Technical Odoo model name, for example res.partner |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseInput schema / properties / ids / items / maximumAdded value: +9007199254740991v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as destructive, and the description adds that deletion is permanent and governed by configured Odoo user permissions. This gives the agent a clear warning about irreversibility and permission dependency beyond the bare destructiveHint flag.
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 a single, efficient sentence with no filler. The key action and irreversibility are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the tool's meaning.
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 destructive delete operation, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted, that it is permanent, and that permissions apply. It does not detail edge cases like deletion failures due to relational constraints, but the annotation and schema provide enough for correct 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 schema documents 'model' with a clear example, but 'ids' has no description. The description's phrase 'one or more Odoo records' partially clarifies that ids correspond to record identifiers, but it does not fully compensate for the missing parameter-level documentation.
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 action ('Permanently delete') and the resource ('one or more Odoo records'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes itself from siblings like odoo_create, odoo_write, and odoo_search_read by focusing on 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?
Usage context is implied by the word 'delete' rather than explicitly stated; an agent can infer to use this when removal of records is intended versus creation or update. However, there are no explicit when-to-use or alternative-routing instructions, so the guidance remains indirect.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.