Unified Salesforce Documentation MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes key behaviors like spidering, hierarchical extraction, bulk scraping, and local SQLite storage, which are valuable. However, it omits details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the database already exists, leaving gaps for a tool with significant operational impact.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, process, and outcome without any wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it highly concise and effective.

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 complexity (bulk web scraping with storage), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers the high-level workflow but misses details on authentication, performance constraints, error scenarios, and output format, which are important for such an operation.

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 67% (2 out of 3 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context by implying 'rootUrl' is for a 'Table of Contents or landing page' and linking 'maxPages' to extraction limits, but it doesn't clarify the undocumented 'category' parameter. This compensates moderately for the schema gap, though not fully.

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 specific action ('Spiders', 'extracts hierarchical links', 'scrapes in bulk') and target resource ('Salesforce documentation page'), with distinct differentiation from sibling tools like 'scrape_single_page' (single vs. bulk) and 'search_local_docs' (extraction vs. search). It provides a complete picture of the tool's function.

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 usage context by specifying 'root Salesforce documentation page' and 'for later searching', suggesting this tool is for initial bulk extraction rather than single-page scraping or searching. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or direct alternatives, though the sibling tool names provide some implicit differentiation.

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