salesforce_deploy_validation_rule

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-readonly. The description adds the routing detail but does not further elaborate on side effects or what 'deploy_validation_rule' entails beyond the name. Given the annotations cover the main safety aspects, the description provides marginal additional transparency.

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, with a clear structure: purpose, routing, and argument definitions. No redundant or extraneous content.

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 simple action tool, the description covers purpose and arguments adequately. It does not mention output schema or potential errors, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (per context), it is reasonably complete.

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?

The schema provides no property descriptions, but the description gives brief but useful explanations: 'message: Free-text objective' and 'inputs: Optional JSON string of structured inputs.' While not exhaustive, it adds meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 action: 'Run the salesforce domain agent `deploy_validation_rule`.' It also explains the routing mechanism through the domain-agent dispatcher, making its purpose unambiguous even without relying on the tool name.

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 explains how the tool operates (via domain-agent dispatcher) but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like other Salesforce tools (e.g., bulk ingest or pipeline report). It implies a use case but lacks explicit guidance on selection.

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