odoo_version

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 communicates that the tool checks connectivity and returns version info, which implies a read-only operation and no side effects. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating or describe any edge cases (e.g., network failures), so transparency is adequate but minimal.

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, clear sentence that covers both the action and the expected result with no waste. It is perfectly front-loaded and concise.

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 simplicity (no parameters) and the existence of an output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose without needing to detail return format. It could theoretically mention that it is safe to call at any time, but that is not a significant gap for such a straightforward tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is complete and there is nothing to add. Per the baseline rule, a score of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter explanations.

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 a specific verb ('Check connectivity') and a specific resource ('Odoo server version info'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like read_records or create_record, which are CRUD operations, whereas this is a version/connectivity check.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description simply states the function without contextual usage cues. Given the wide variety of sibling tools, this lack of usage guidance leaves the agent to infer appropriateness.

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