Skip to main content
Glama

ppm_risk_start_monitoring

Transition a risk to 'monitoring' status to activate ongoing oversight and control of its mitigation.

Instructions

Transition a risk to 'monitoring'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
risk_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The tool handler function for ppm_risk_start_monitoring. Calls the Odoo 'action_start_monitoring' action on the ppm.risk model and returns the updated state.
    @mcp.tool()
    def ppm_risk_start_monitoring(risk_id: int) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Transition a risk to 'monitoring'."""
        client().call_action("ppm.risk", "action_start_monitoring", [risk_id])
        return _read_state("ppm.risk", risk_id, _RISK_FIELDS)
  • The _RISK_FIELDS list defines the fields read back after the action, serving as the implicit output schema for the tool.
    _RISK_FIELDS = [
        "name",
        "state",
        "risk_type",
        "probability",
        "impact",
        "risk_score",
        "risk_level",
        "project_id",
        "owner_id",
    ]
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the function as an MCP tool named 'ppm_risk_start_monitoring'.
    @mcp.tool()
    def ppm_risk_start_monitoring(risk_id: int) -> dict[str, Any]:
  • The _read_state helper function reads the current state of a record from Odoo, used to return the updated risk after the action.
    def _read_state(model: str, rec_id: int, fields: list[str]) -> dict[str, Any]:
        rows = client().read(model, [rec_id], fields)
        if not rows:
            raise ValueError(f"{model} id={rec_id} not found")
        return rows[0]
  • The call_action helper on OdooClient invokes an action_* button method on the Odoo model, which is what the tool uses to transition the risk state.
    def call_action(self, model: str, method: str, ids: list[int]) -> Any:
        """Invoke an `action_*` button method on the given record ids."""
        return self.execute_kw(model, method, [ids])
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the transition, but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, reversibility, or what the output schema returns. The agent is left uninformed.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While the description is extremely concise (one sentence), it is under-specified and not truly concise. It lacks critical details and does not front-load the most important information for the agent.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the output schema exists and only one parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the state transition behavior, constraints, or how to use the output. With many sibling risk tools, the agent needs more context to select correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should explain the risk_id parameter. However, it does not mention risk_id at all. The agent must infer meaning solely from the parameter name, which is insufficient for proper invocation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action (transition) and target state (monitoring) on the resource (risk). It is specific verb+resource+state, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like ppm_risk_start_analysis or ppm_risk_start_mitigation which have similar patterns.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the risk must be in a specific prior state before transitioning to monitoring.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wethti/qod-ppm-odoo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server