query_bill

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

Absent annotations, the description reveals essential behavior: top_count maps to TopRowCount and also acts as page size; limit is only honored when top_count=0; start_row supports pagination via next_start_row. It also states the return type. It does not mention authentication or side effects, but 'query' implies a read-only operation.

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?

Structured as an Args docstring, it front-loads function purpose and uses compact bullet-like entries for each parameter with examples. It is slightly long but every sentence contributes to clarification.

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?

Covers all 7 parameters with semantics and interaction rules, and specifies return format. Since an output schema exists, return values are handled there. The only significant absence is sibling-tool usage guidance, which is already penalized in usage_guidelines.

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 provides only property names with zero descriptions. The description compensates by explaining form_id common values, field_keys comma-separated format, filter_string and order_string examples, top_count semantics including Kingdee TopRowCount/Limit interaction, start_row pagination, and limit condition.

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 '查询金蝶云星空单据数据（返回二维数组）' clearly identifying the operation (query), resource (Kingdee Cloud Star documents), and return format (2D array). It differentiates from siblings like query_bill_json (JSON output) and count_bill (count).

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?

Despite thorough parameter explanations, the description never mentions when to prefer query_bill over other sibling tools such as query_bill_json, view_bill, or query_bill_all. There is no alternative guidance or exclusion criteria.

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