salesforce_manage_debug_logs

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 states that 'The tool validates that the specified user exists before performing operations' and 'If logLevel is not specified when enabling logs, the tool will ask for clarification.' It also discloses defaults and operation-specific behaviors. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., whether disabling removes prior configurations) or response formats, which are minor gaps.

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 well-structured with an introductory line, four concrete examples, and a bulleted list of notes. Every part adds value, and the content is front-loaded with the main purpose. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool with no redundancy.

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 is comprehensive for a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema. It covers all operations, parameters, defaults, and behavioral nuances. The only missing piece is a description of the output/return format, which would be helpful for an agent to invoke it fully, but given the absence of an output schema, the description is largely complete.

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?

Although the schema already provides 100% parameter coverage, the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema. It explains operation-specific parameter usage, defaults, and examples. For instance, it clarifies that logLevel is required for 'enable' and lists all valid log levels. This enriches the schema definitions.

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's purpose: 'Manage debug logs for Salesforce users - enable, disable, or retrieve logs.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the examples clarify each operation. The tool is distinct from its siblings (e.g., query, DML, Apex) by focusing on debug log management.

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 clear guidance on when to use each operation through examples and notes, including parameter requirements and defaults (e.g., 'logLevel is optional (defaults to DEBUG)' and 'limit is optional for retrieve'). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the operations are well-specified.

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