salesforce_log_call

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

Annotations already flag readOnly=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description adds that the action routes through a domain-agent dispatcher scoped to JWT, tenant, and company. However, it does not disclose the concrete side effect of logging a call, so the description only partially supplements the 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?

The description is short, front-loaded, and free of filler. The routing sentence earns its place by providing scope context, and the Args section is cleanly structured.

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?

A destructive, open-world Salesforce action with no schema descriptions needs more than a generic objective/inputs wrapper. The output schema may cover return values, but the effect of the action, expected input payload details, and relationship to other Salesforce tools are missing.

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 has no property descriptions, and the description does add roles: message is a free-text objective and inputs is an optional JSON string of structured inputs. However, it leaves the actual shape or expected contents of the inputs undefined, so it only partially compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 core sentence only restates the tool name ('Run the salesforce domain agent action `log_call`') and the rest describes routing mechanics rather than what logging a call actually does. An agent cannot tell from this description what behavior log_call triggers in Salesforce or how it differs from salesforce_create_task or salesforce_create_note.

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 alternative Salesforce actions or sibling tools. The routing/scope sentence hints at context but provides no selection criteria, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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