salesforce_deploy_flow

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

Annotations already convey destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the action is dispatched under JWT/tenant/company scope, which is useful scoping context beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose what side effects deploying a flow may have on the target Salesforce org.

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 short and contains no filler, which is positive. However, the brevity sacrifices substantive content: the core purpose and parameter semantics are under-specified. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent deploy operation, the description leaves too much unspecified: what flow is deployed, where it comes from, prerequisites, and expected outcomes. The output schema may describe return values, but the primary function and invocation semantics remain ambiguous. An agent cannot confidently infer when and how to invoke this 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it barely does. 'message: Free-text objective' and 'inputs: Optional JSON string of structured inputs' add minimal meaning beyond the schema's string types and defaults. There is no explanation of what the message should contain, what fields the inputs JSON should include, or what a valid deploy request looks like.

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 begins with 'Run the salesforce domain agent action deploy_flow', which essentially restates the tool name without explaining what deploying a flow actually does or accomplishes. It adds routing mechanics ('Routes through the platform's domain-agent dispatcher') but this is about transport, not purpose. It also does not distinguish deploy_flow from sibling tools like salesforce_deploy_apex_class or salesforce_list_flows.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of when not to use it. The statement about JWT/tenant/company scope describes invocation context, not usage conditions. An agent has no basis for choosing deploy_flow over other deployment or Salesforce tools.

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