salesforce_list_objects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does convey that results are filtered by the user's access ('visible to the authenticated user'), which is a relevant behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose pagination, return format, or any potential side effects, leaving significant behavioral aspects unspecified.

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, crisp sentence that immediately conveys the tool's main action and scope. There is no extraneous text, and it is well structured for quick comprehension.

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 covers the basic purpose but omits guidance on the 'org' parameter and provides no usage context. It does not explain how to handle the output or when to use it among the many sibling Salesforce tools. Given the availability of an output schema, the return format may be covered, but the overall definition feels thin for an agent needing to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 a single optional parameter 'org' with no description in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving the agent without any explanation of what 'org' refers to or how to use it. This is a complete failure to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('Salesforce objects'), and defines scope ('visible to the authenticated user'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like salesforce_describe_object which targets a single object.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and it does not mention any prerequisites or exclusion cases. The only contextual hint is the scope 'visible to the authenticated user,' but there is no explicit when/how to choose it over salesforce_describe_object or salesforce_query.

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