kingdee_query_cost_items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it returns a JSON list, but no behavioral traits beyond that, such as pagination behavior or whether it works without form_id being set.

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 very concise with a clear main line, examples, and return type note. No redundant sentences; every part earns its place.

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 existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and provides practical examples. However, it does not specify what form_id should be used for cost items, which is a required parameter and likely has a fixed value.

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 has rich descriptions for all parameters, but the description adds domain-specific examples for filter_string and field_keys, which are valuable beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 it queries cost item basic data (CB_CostItem), aligning with the name and distinguishing from many sibling query tools by specifying the resource type.

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?

Provides concrete examples of filter_string and field_keys, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs other query tools, nor any context about prerequisites or limitations.

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