kingdee_query_supplier_quotes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it returns a JSON list, but does not elaborate on rate limits, authentication, or other behavioral traits. The disclosure is adequate given annotation coverage.

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?

Description is concise, with a clear front-loaded purpose, followed by business context, practical examples, and a return format note. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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 tool's complexity, annotations (read-only, idempotent), and the presence of an output schema, the description covers essential usage aspects. It explains the data source, business need, and key filters. Minor omission: pagination is not mentioned, but it is covered 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?

While the input schema provides basic descriptions for each property, the description adds significant value by offering specific filter_string examples (FDocumentStatus, FSupplierId, FMaterialId) and recommended field_keys, which clarify usage beyond the generic schema.

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?

Description clearly states '查询供应商报价单（SVM_QuoteBill）列表', identifying the specific resource (supplier quotes) and action (query list). It explains the tool is for supplier responses to inquiries and price comparison, distinguishing it from sibling tools like kingdee_query_sale_quotations (customer quotations) and other 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?

Description provides context on when to use: for supplier quote retrieval and price comparison. It gives concrete filter examples for common use cases (e.g., by status, supplier, material) and recommends field_keys. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention sibling alternatives.

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