kingdee_query_purchase_inquiry

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds that the return is JSON, but does not disclose pagination limits, error handling, or the effect of invalid inputs. Value added is moderate.

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 concise and well-structured: purpose first, then explanation, filter examples, field recommendations, and return type. No extraneous information, every sentence 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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers key aspects: what it does, how to filter, what fields to request, and the return format. It lacks details on pagination defaults or error conditions, which are partially covered by the schema. Overall, fairly complete for a 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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema by providing specific, context-aware examples for filter_string and field_keys. Schema descriptions are generic, but the tool description gives practical, domain-specific values that help an agent select correct parameters.

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 the purchase inquiry list (SVM_InquiryBill/RFQ), explaining what RFQ is. It distinguishes from sibling tools like kingdee_query_purchase_orders and kingdee_query_purchase_requisitions by specifying the exact entity 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 filter_string examples (e.g., '已审核' and '指定供应商') and recommended field_keys, offering practical usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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