kingdee_create_and_audit

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: it stops on first failure without auto-retry, returns halted_at and recovery_hint, and logs a single entry (op='create_and_audit'). It also mentions that any step failure gives a recovery hint. Annotations already mark destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds context on failure handling and logging compression, but does not address idempotency (idempotentHint=false) or clarify if the tool always creates vs. updates.

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 concise and well-structured. The first sentence immediately communicates the core functionality. It uses bullet points for failure behavior and clearly separates the return format. 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?

Given the tool's complexity (three-step workflow), the description fully covers the workflow, failure modes, recovery hints, logging behavior, and return format. The input schema provides parameter details, and the description explains the return JSON structure. No gaps remain for an AI to successfully invoke the tool.

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?

The description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the input schema already provides. The schema itself includes descriptions for form_id, model, need_update_fields, and is_delete_entry. Since schema description coverage from the description text is 0%, but the schema already sufficiently describes parameters, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 performs three sequential steps (Save, Submit, Audit) in one call, preventing the AI from missing intermediate steps. It distinguishes itself from the manual chain of sibling tools kingdee_save_bill, kingdee_submit_bills, kingdee_audit_bills by offering a combined, error-reduced path.

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 explicitly defines when to use this tool ('明确要一条龙创建并使单据生效，没有中间审批/校验需求') and when not to, providing an alternative manual chain. This gives clear guidance for correct selection.

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