aggregate_records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read-only operation. The description adds that it uses server-side Postgres aggregation and version-specific methods (formatted_read_group vs read_group), which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 only two sentences, both dense with information. The first sentence states the core purpose and method, the second adds version-specific detail. No extraneous content.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema that explains return values, the description lacks completeness for a tool with 9 parameters and complex aggregation behavior. It does not cover parameter semantics, usage context, or edge cases, leaving significant gaps for an agent to handle correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for the 9 parameters, the description must compensate but fails to explain any parameter beyond mentioning groupby/sum/count. It does not clarify the meaning of 'measures', 'domain', 'lazy', 'limit', 'offset', 'order', or 'instance', leaving the agent with insufficient guidance.

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 aggregates Odoo records server-side using Postgres groupby/sum/count, which directly matches the name. It distinguishes from siblings like search_records and read_record by focusing on aggregation rather than retrieval or search.

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 the tool is for aggregation tasks but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like search_records. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided, which would improve clarity.

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