Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lightbulb-mcp

lightbulb-mcp

by RPasquale
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

salesforce_deploy_permission_set

Destructive

Deploy a Salesforce permission set via domain-agent dispatch, passing a free-text objective or structured JSON inputs under your JWT, tenant, and company scope.

Instructions

Run the salesforce domain agent action deploy_permission_set.

Routes through the platform's domain-agent dispatcher under your JWT, tenant, and company scope.

Args: message: Free-text objective for the action. inputs: Optional JSON string of structured inputs for the action.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "salesforce_deploy_permission_set"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputsNo{}
messageNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds only that the action 'routes through the platform's domain-agent dispatcher under your JWT, tenant, and company scope,' which reveals scoping context but says nothing about side effects, deployment behavior, or potential destructive outcomes. Annotations already mark destructiveHint true and readOnly false, so the description adds little beyond that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the purpose line, followed by a scope sentence and argument summaries. It wastes no words, though one sentence largely repeats the tool name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that the tool is a concrete Salesforce deployment action with an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the action accomplishes, what the message and inputs should contain in real terms, what side effects occur, or how output relates to the deployment. The generic domain-agent wording could apply to any of the many sibling actions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the empty parameter documentation. It only labels `message` as 'Free-text objective' and `inputs` as 'Optional JSON string of structured inputs'—generic phrases that give no indication of the expected schema, keys, or example content for a permission-set deployment.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies the specific action with the verb 'Run' but provides no real-world meaning—it never says what deploying a permission set actually does or why the user would call it. It is essentially a template line that names the tool back in backticks, adding almost no clarity beyond the name itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `dispatch_domain_agent` or other Salesforce tools. No prerequisites, conditions, or non-use cases are mentioned. The sentence about routing through the dispatcher is an implementation detail, not usage guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools