connector_salesforce_bulk_ingest_create

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

Annotations already indicate this is non-read-only, idempotent, and destructive, and the description adds useful context: it only routes through the governed connector authority, `effect` must be claimed and verified by Spring, and `approval_ref` is needed when resuming a write. This meaningfully clarifies authorization and approval behavior beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 compact, front-loaded with the operation identity and routing constraint, and then organized as a tight parameter list. Every line adds information, and there is no filler or redundant elaboration.

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 parameter list and governance context cover the wrapper's mechanics, and the output schema handles return-value documentation. However, the description does not explain what should go inside the `arguments` JSON payload, what the created bulk-ingest entity is, or how this tool fits into the bulk-ingest lifecycle relative to siblings like upload, status, results, and close.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the semantics, and it does document all seven parameters with one-line explanations. Some entries such as `arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation` remain circular and vague, but `effect`, `idempotency_key`, `approval_ref`, and `connector_account_ref` receive useful operational meaning.

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 identifies this as the `salesforce.bulk_ingest_create` connector operation and says it routes through a governed connector authority, but it never states what the operation actually does, such as creating a Salesforce bulk ingest job or session. The core action is mainly inferable from the tool's name, making the purpose somewhat vague rather than explicitly described.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling bulk-ingest, query, or Salesforce connector tools. It mentions governance routing but does not give selection criteria, exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites beyond the parameter list.

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