kingdee_query_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read-only operation. The description adds transparency by stating the return format (JSON str) and providing concrete filter examples, which help the agent understand the tool's behavior beyond the 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 succinct and well-structured: a single-line purpose, bullet points for common filters, recommended fields, and return type. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 4 parameters and the existence of an output schema (per context), the description is mostly complete with usage examples and return format. It lacks details on pagination (start_row, limit), but the schema covers that. The description adds enough context for typical use cases.

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?

Despite the schema description coverage being 0% (per context), the description compensates with explicit examples for filter_string and recommended field_keys, adding meaning beyond the parameter names and types. However, it does not cover start_row and limit parameters, which are present in the 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?

The description clearly states the verb '查询' and resource '用户列表', and the tool name itself specifies 'kingdee_query_user', making it obvious that it queries user data. This distinguishes it from sibling query tools for other entities, such as kingdee_query_inventory or kingdee_query_bills.

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 common filter string examples and recommended field keys, which imply usage patterns for querying users, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like kingdee_query_role or kingdee_query_permission. No explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with siblings is provided.

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