Find Odoo clients by partial name match. Returns ID, name, email, and phone for up to 5 matches.
Busca clientes en Odoo cuyos nombres coincidan (parcialmente, sin importar mayúsculas/minúsculas) con el nombre proporcionado. Devuelve ID, Nombre, Email, Teléfono (máx 5).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nombre_cliente | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the partial match, case-insensitivity, return fields, and the 5-result limit. It does not mention error handling or no-match behavior, but for a read-only search this is sufficient.
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 that front-loads the action and includes key details (matching behavior, return fields, limit) without any unnecessary wording.
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 low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it searches, how it matches, and what it returns. It lacks explicit error or empty-result behavior, but that is not critical for a simple search.
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 has only one parameter (nombre_cliente) with 0% description coverage. The description adds that the provided name is used for partial, case-insensitive matching, which clarifies the parameter's semantics beyond the raw name. However, it does not provide format or length constraints.
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 (busca), the resource (clientes en Odoo), the matching behavior (parcial, case-insensitive), and the return fields with a max limit. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like buscar_producto which search a different entity.
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 its usage for searching customers by name, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or any exclusion criteria. For a simple search tool, this is adequate but not explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.