kingdee_query_permission_changes

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting that permission data may be split across multiple Kingdee forms and that empty results should trigger inspection with kingdee_get_fields.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses a short recommended-scenarios list plus a fallback note. It is efficient and readable, with only minor verbosity in the explanatory scenarios.

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?

For a read-only query tool with annotations and an output schema, the description provides enough context to call it correctly. It covers purpose, use cases, and a data-source caveat, though it could more explicitly address relationship to sibling permission and audit tools.

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 nested schema documents fields such as action, date ranges, user_name, and filter_string, but the description itself adds little parameter-level guidance. It does not explain filtering syntax, pagination behavior, or how action/object_type values interact with the query.

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 states a specific verb and resource: querying permission change records in Kingdee Cloud. It clarifies that these are grant/revoke/modify operations, which distinguishes it from a general permission lookup or audit log query.

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?

It gives clear recommended scenarios: security audit, compliance trail, and troubleshooting. It also provides a fallback when no results are found, pointing to kingdee_get_fields, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as kingdee_query_permission or kingdee_query_audit_log.

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