odoo_attachment_download

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns metadata and base64 content, or optionally saves to a local path. However, it does not mention any side effects, error conditions, or access restrictions, which is adequate but not excellent.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the action and output. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately hints at return values. It covers the tool's core function and optional behaviour. Minor omissions (e.g., error handling) do not significantly detract from completeness for a simple retrieval 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 input schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds the return format (base64) as context but does not deepen parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states. Schema coverage is high enough that the description's contribution is marginal.

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 explicitly states the action ('Download an ir.attachment') and the resource ('from Odoo by ID'), with clear output details (filename, mimetype, size, base64 content). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'odoo_attachment_upload'.

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 use when you need to download an attachment by ID, but lacks explicit when-not or alternative guidance. No sibling comparison or exclusion criteria are provided.

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