kingdee_query_fixed_asset

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 the formId and filter examples but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or authentication needs. It is consistent but not especially rich.

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, starting with purpose, then context, then examples. Every sentence adds value. It is concise yet informative, with no redundant information.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description covers filtering capabilities and provides usage examples. It is complete for a query tool, though it could mention pagination parameters which are only in 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 description adds concrete examples for filter_string and recommends a set of field_keys, which goes beyond the schema descriptions. Despite schema description coverage being 0% in the tool description, the examples provide practical guidance for parameter usage.

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 specifies the tool queries fixed asset card master data, naming the API and formId. It defines fixed assets. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kingdee_query_asset_card, though the domain specificity provides implicit distinction.

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 states it supports filtering by asset number, name, status, and department, and provides example filter_strings. However, it gives no guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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