odoo_get_field_translations

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool auto-detects translate type via fields_get and returns language-keyed values in specific formats, which is transparent about its behavior. No side effects mentioned, but it's a read operation.

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 with two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value without 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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description explains return formats, auto-detection, and example fields. It is mostly complete, though it could mention error cases like non-translatable fields.

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?

Schema coverage is low (25%), and the description only adds context for field_name (translatable) and gives examples. It does not explain connection or model meaning beyond basic names. The examples help but do not fully compensate for missing parameter descriptions.

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 tool reads translations for a translatable field, distinguishing it from sibling write tools like odoo_translate_field. It includes specific verb 'Read' and resource 'translations for a translatable field on a record'.

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 explains when to use (to read translations) and provides examples of fields, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like odoo_translate_context_aware.

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