MCP Odoo Server

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 mentions pagination via limit/offset and the return format, which adds some context, but it doesn't cover important aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or whether the operation is read-only or has side effects. For a list tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 well-structured and concise, with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with essential information.

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 tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return value details), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the purpose, parameters, and return overview, but could improve by adding usage context or behavioral details to fully compensate for the lack of annotations.

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 description adds meaningful semantics beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'limit' is the 'Maximum number (default: 50)' and 'offset' is for 'Offset for pagination (default: 0)', clarifying their roles and defaults. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions, though it doesn't detail constraints like valid ranges.

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 'List' and resource 'available leave types in Odoo', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_leave_allocations' or 'list_public_holidays', which are related but distinct list operations in the same domain.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, context for use, or how it differs from other list tools in the sibling set, such as 'list_leave_allocations' for leave allocations or 'list_public_holidays' for holidays.

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