kingdee_query_audit_log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description is not required to repeat these. It adds context by explaining the data fields and return format, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs), which is acceptable given 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 well-structured: first states the main purpose, then details what the log records, followed by recommended scenarios, and finally return field descriptions. It is concise without being terse, though slightly longer than necessary.

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 (many parameters) and the presence of annotations indicating read-only, the description covers the core purpose, usage scenarios, and return fields. It explains the intent and data structure, making it sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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 input schema provides detailed descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description lists return fields, which is helpful but not directly related to parameters. Baseline score 3 applies as schema coverage is high.

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 name 'kingdee_query_audit_log' and title '查询审计日志' directly state the action and resource. The description specifies that it queries audit logs from Kingdee Cloud Star (BOS_AuditLog), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like approval flow or pending approvals by focusing on audit trail data.

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 provides explicit recommended scenarios: compliance audit, problem investigation, and responsibility tracing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, which would improve clarity for an AI agent.

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