kingdee_query_sale_quotations

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

The description discloses important environment-specific behavior: the salesperson field is FSalerId rather than standard FSalesmanId, and using FSalesmanId causes a 500 error. It also explains that FTotalAmount is absent from the main table and that amounts live in the entry table, which is valuable beyond the read-only annotations.

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, followed by practical filter examples, recommended fields, and targeted caveats. The bullet structure is efficient and every section adds actionable 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?

Output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description does not need to explain return values or read-only semantics. It is nearly complete for a query tool, with the main remaining gap being pagination and ordering guidance.

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 reported as 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It supplies useful filter_string examples and recommended field_keys with the exact field names, plus a critical warning about FSalerId, but it does not explain limit, start_row, or order_string behavior.

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: query sale quotations (SAL_Quotation) list. It clearly distinguishes the tool from generic bill querying by noting that amount queries require kingdee_query_bills or kingdee_get_fields, and it names the exact form ID.

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 provides concrete filter_string examples for common cases such as audited, customer-specific, and non-expired quotations. It also explicitly routes amount-related queries to kingdee_query_bills and field discovery to kingdee_get_fields, though it lacks a full when-not-to-use explanation versus related sales-order query tools.

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