salesforce_describe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool's behavior as retrieving schema information, which is a read-only operation, but does not disclose other traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. The description is accurate but lacks depth for a tool with no annotation support.

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 and key details. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource, with no redundant or unnecessary information, 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 tool's complexity (metadata retrieval with one optional parameter) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the purpose and parameter behavior, but could improve by mentioning authentication needs or output format. It is adequate for a read-only tool with good schema coverage.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that leaving the parameter empty returns a list of all available objects, which is not explicitly stated in the schema description. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's basic parameter 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed schema information for any Salesforce object', specifying the content includes 'all fields, data types, and permissions'. It distinguishes from siblings like salesforce_query (data retrieval) and salesforce_create/update/delete (mutations) by focusing on metadata.

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 for schema exploration, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions getting a list of all available objects when the parameter is empty, which provides some context, but lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., authentication) or comparisons to other tools like salesforce_setup.

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