run_soql_query

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility. It fails to disclose that SOQL is read-only, whether permissions are needed, query limits, timeout behavior, or error handling. The agent lacks critical behavioral context.

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 concise, front-loads the purpose, and includes necessary usage guidance without redundancy. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is efficient.

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?

Without an output schema or annotations, the description should cover return format, error conditions, and side effects. It only describes input, leaving the agent uninformed about what to expect from the output.

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, the description adds useful guidance on how to construct the query (use column names, use Id for count). However, it does not specify syntax constraints, query length limits, or parameter format details, leaving gaps.

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 it executes a SOQL query against Salesforce, which is a distinct operation among sibling tools that include CRUD and other API calls. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 explicit advice on using column names and gives a specific example for aggregate/count queries. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool (e.g., for simple record retrieval) or compare to alternatives like get_record.

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