kingdee_query_delivery_notice

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds valuable environment-specific behavior: the FCustomerID vs FCustId field-key pitfall and the explicit no-write scope, though it does not discuss pagination or rate 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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded, with useful headings and bullets. The field-key warning is slightly verbose in repeating the failure mode and verification context, but each section remains actionable.

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?

With an output schema and safety annotations already present, the description supplies the key invocation details: FormId, query-only boundary, filter syntax, recommended field keys, and the critical environment-specific key caveat. Pagination and ordering defaults are adequately left to the schema.

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 schema already documents each parameter, giving a baseline of 3. The description goes beyond it with concrete filter_string examples for status, customer, and date ranges, plus a validated field_keys list; limit, start_row, and order_string remain schema-only.

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?

States a specific verb '查询' and resource '发货通知单', pins FormId SAL_DELIVERYNOTICE, and describes the customer/status/date filtering scope. The write-scope warning also distinguishes it from mutation siblings such as kingdee_save_bill and kingdee_submit_bills.

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?

Explicitly says the tool is query-only and that save/submit/audit actions are handled by named generic alternatives. It also directs agents to verify field keys via kingdee_get_fields, giving clear when-not and alternative guidance.

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