kingdee_save_asset

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

Annotations are minimal (no safety hints). The description discloses that new assets start as draft and require submit+audit, and that modifying audited assets needs reverse audit. This adds valuable behavioral context 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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no waste. First sentence states purpose, second explains initial state, third explains modification. Efficient and clear.

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?

The description covers the main behavioral context but is silent on return value or error handling. An output schema exists but its details are not described. For a save tool, lacking return info reduces completeness.

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 input schema's sub-parameters have descriptions (e.g., form_id, model), but the tool description does not add extra meaning or explain how to set form_id to 'FA_FAGet'. Schema coverage is present, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 '新增或修改固定资产' (add or modify fixed assets) along with the specific form type FA_FAGet. It distinguishes from sibling save tools like kingdee_save_bill which handle different entities.

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 context on when to use: for creating or modifying fixed assets. It explains the lifecycle (draft -> submit+audit, reverse audit for edits) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like kingdee_create_and_audit.

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