erp2pdf-studio-mcp

by c4pointer

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

delete_email_template

Deletes an Odoo email template by ID, letting agents remove obsolete templates from shared template management.

Instructions

Delete an email template.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "email_template_id": "<email_template_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_email_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`email_template_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

D1.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description is expected to carry the behavioral burden. However, deletion is a destructive operation, and the description provides zero context regarding reversibility, required permissions, or potential side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While it is concise (one sentence), the brevity results in zero informational value. It is a tautology and fails to front-load any useful context, such as scope or operational constraints.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that it is a deletion tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is critically incomplete. An agent requires more context, such as confirming the ID refers to the internal record or if dependent resources are also removed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema coverage is 0% (the description adds no detail beyond the parameter name). The description fails entirely to compensate for this lack of semantic information, providing no context on the required `email_template_id` beyond its existence.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is a simple statement of function ('Delete an email template'), which is clear but highly generic. It does not distinguish this specific deletion mechanism from other template-related deletion tools potentially existing in the sibling list (e.g., delete_template).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There are no usage guidelines provided. The description offers no instruction on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `get_email_template` or `update_email_template`, leaving the agent to rely entirely on trial and error.

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