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 full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching 'locally extracted Salesforce documentation' which implies read-only access to pre-existing data, but doesn't specify whether this is a safe read operation, what permissions might be needed, or any rate limits. The description doesn't disclose what format results come in, whether there's pagination, or how the search algorithm works.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool and front-loads the essential information.

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?

For a search tool with 2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the search returns, how results are structured, what fields are searchable, or any limitations of the local database. The description should provide more context about the search scope and result format.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for both parameters (query and maxResults), the description provides no information about parameter meaning, format, or constraints. It doesn't explain what type of search query is expected (keywords, natural language, etc.), what maxResults controls, or any default values. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 action ('Search') and target resource ('locally extracted Salesforce documentation in the SQLite database'), providing specific verb+resource pairing. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'mass_extract_guide' or 'scrape_single_page', which appear to be extraction/scraping tools rather than search tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this search tool is appropriate compared to other search methods or how it relates to its sibling tools (mass_extract_guide, scrape_single_page). There's no context about prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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