Get Salesforce OAuth2 Authorization URL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context that this is a URL generation step requiring user interaction and describes the follow-up redirect and code parameter, enhancing understanding of behavior beyond annotations.

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?

Three sentences: first defines purpose, second details the flow, third optional switch. Front-loaded, no redundancy, every sentence adds value.

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?

Tool has 3 params, no output schema. Description covers flow and next steps, but could briefly mention that the generated URL includes the client_id and redirect_uri. Overall sufficiently complete for an auth URL generation tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage. Description adds real-world meaning: explains sandbox parameter effect, role of redirect_uri in flow, and identifies sf_client_id as Consumer Key, providing practical usage context.

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 generates the Salesforce OAuth2 authorization URL for a Connected App, with specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings by naming the next step (sf_exchange_oauth_code) and implying the code flow, not other auth methods.

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 outlines the complete flow: generate URL → browser approval → code exchange, indicating when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternative flows like password grant (sf_get_token_password_flow), leaving minor ambiguity.

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