get_module_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the purpose and does not reveal side effects, read-only nature, or other behavioral traits. For a tool requesting statistics, it is unclear if any state changes occur.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a bullet-point-like listing of args and returns. Every piece of information serves a purpose without redundancy. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 existence of an output schema (not shown but known from context signals), the description does not need to detail return values extensively. It briefly describes returns as 'counts by item type'. The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers purpose, input with examples, and return type. Minor gap: behavioral traits not disclosed, but overall adequate.

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 input schema has a single 'module' parameter with type string and no description (0% coverage). The description adds examples ('e.g., 'sale', 'account', 'stock''), which significantly helps the agent understand expected values. This goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Get' and the resource 'detailed statistics for a specific Odoo module'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_modules' (which lists modules) and 'get_item_details' (which gets details of items).

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 does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The agent is given no context to differentiate between this and similar tools like 'get_item_details'.

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