Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Odoo Claude MCP

Odoo Claude MCP

by rosenvladimirov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

proxy_discover

Discover available tools on internal MCP sub-services like portainer, github, or teams. Use this to see what tools are accessible for each service.

Instructions

List available tools on an internal MCP sub-service. Call this first to see what tools are available on portainer/github/teams.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "service": "<service>"
    },
    "name": "proxy_discover"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceYesTarget MCP service

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It indicates a read operation (listing tools) but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or side effects. The simplicity of the tool limits the need for extensive transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences are direct and front-loaded, with no extraneous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple discovery tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention the output format (list of tool names), but the general pattern is understandable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a single parameter 'service' having enum values. The description mentions portainer/github/teams, aligning with the enum, but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists available tools on an internal MCP sub-service, with specific examples (portainer, github, teams). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like proxy_call and proxy_refresh.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'Call this first' provides clear usage guidance, implying it should be used before other tools on the sub-service. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative scenarios.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools