query_so_mo_relation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It accurately describes the function as a query, but lacks details on default limits, possible pagination, or read-only nature. The behavior is implied but not fully transparent.

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 a single sentence that immediately states the purpose and included aspects. No redundant words; every part contributes to understanding.

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 lacks essential details for a query with date range and optional limit parameters. It does not explain how parameters filter results, nor does it mention default limit or output structure (despite having an output schema). The description is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it does not explain the parameters (start_date, end_date, limit) or how they relate to the output content. The description adds no value beyond the schema titles.

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 tool queries the relationship between sales orders and production work orders, listing three included aspects (completion status, delivery risk, material picking). It distinguishes from siblings like query_delivery_risk and query_material_shortage by focusing on the SO-MO relationship.

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 implies the tool is used to retrieve SO-MO relations but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like query_delivery_risk or export_so_mo_report. No exclusions or conditional usage are mentioned.

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