scan_addons_source

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying 'without importing addon code', which reveals a behavioral trait beyond annotations (no code execution). However, it doesn't disclose other behaviors like file system access limits.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It's not verbose, but it lacks structure to cover all necessary aspects.

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 complexity (3 parameters, scanning local files), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the scan returns, how to use parameters, or important constraints (e.g., file size limits). The presence of an output schema mitigates slightly but not enough.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does not mention addons_paths, max_files, or max_file_bytes at all, leaving the agent without clues about how to configure the scan. This is a critical gap.

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 action 'scan' and the resource 'local Odoo addon source', and distinguishes by noting it does so 'without importing addon code', which is a key differentiator from sibling tools that might execute code.

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 implicitly suggests this tool is for inspecting addon files, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like execute_method or diagnose_odoo_call. No when-not or alternative names are provided.

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