salesforce_publish_platform_event

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. It adds context about routing through the platform dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, which is useful, but it does not describe the actual Salesforce-side effects of publishing the event. The description's added behavioral value is modest beyond 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 and has a clear Args list, with no filler. The opening line somewhat redundantly repeats the tool name, but the overall structure earns its place. It is easy to scan.

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 tool with no schema documentation and vague parameter semantics, the description is incomplete. It lacks usage criteria, examples, and explanation of what a platform event is or what a successful publish looks like. Although an output schema exists, the provided context is insufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool reliably among hundreds of siblings.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden. It gives minimal meaning: message is 'free-text objective' and inputs is 'Optional JSON string of structured inputs,' which is a start but does not specify the expected shape of the JSON, constraints, or how the message should be phrased. An agent would have to guess at valid inputs.

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 a specific verb and resource: "Run the salesforce domain agent action `publish_platform_event`." It distinguishes itself from sibling direct-call tools by noting it routes through the domain-agent dispatcher, but it never explicitly explains what publishing a platform event entails or how it differs from e.g. salesforce_passthrough, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No when-to-use or alternative-routing guidance is given. The description only states that the tool runs the domain agent action, without stating when a user request should map to this tool versus the generic dispatch_domain_agent or direct Salesforce write tools. Context is implied by the tool name, not explained.

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