salesforce_manage_field_permissions

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It lists operations and mentions bulk updates, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting existing permissions), required permissions (e.g., ModifyAllData), or error conditions. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured with bullet points, examples, and clear separation of operations. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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?

The description covers operations and examples, but lacks details on return output for 'view' operation, error handling, prerequisites (permissions), and behavior when profiles overlap. Given the tool's complexity (6 params, multiple operations), more context is needed for full completeness.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing examples that reinforce parameter usage (e.g., listing profiles as array) and mentioning bulk updates, which goes beyond schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states the tool manages field-level security, listing operations (grant, revoke, view) and mentioning custom/standard fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like salesforce_manage_field which deals with field creation/deletion, not permissions.

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?

Description provides three concrete examples illustrating common use cases (grant admin access, give read-only, check access). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or alternatives, the examples give clear context for usage.

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