kingdee_query_material_cost

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's addition of return format (JSON list) is helpful but not essential. It adds database name but lacks details on authorization or rate limits, which is acceptable given the strong annotation profile.

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 brief, uses bullet points for examples, and clearly separates sections. 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 presence of an output schema and detailed parameter schema, the description covers the essential query logic, return type, and usage patterns. Nothing critical is missing for a read-only query 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% per context, so the description bears the burden. It adds value by providing concrete filter_string and field_keys examples, but does not explain form_id, order_string, start_row, or limit. This partial coverage justifies a 3.

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 queries a specific database (BD_MaterialCost) and returns standard, latest, and average costs. The verb '查询' combined with the specific resource '物料成本库' makes the purpose distinct from sibling query tools.

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 filter string examples and recommended field keys, guiding usage. However, it does not contrast with similar tools like kingdee_query_finished_product_cost or mention when not to use this tool, leaving some ambiguity.

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