sf_agent_preview_end

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states that sessions are ended and trace info is returned, but it does not explain side effects (e.g., whether ending is destructive, if it applies to all sessions or a specific one, or any prerequisites). The presence of parameters like endAll and sessionId is not reflected in the description.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the core function and expected return. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, though it may be too brief relative to the tool's complexity.

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?

With 8 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently detailed. It does not explain how to specify which sessions to end (endAll vs sessionId), how to target an org, or what 'trace info' includes. The tool's behavior is likely more complex than the description suggests.

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 input schema contains 8 parameters with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention any parameter names, purposes, or how they relate to ending sessions. The agent receives no additional meaning beyond the raw schema, so it cannot correctly determine parameter values.

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 ('End Agentforce preview sessions') and the additional output ('return trace info'). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like sf_agent_preview_start, sf_agent_preview_send, and sf_agent_preview_sessions.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is understandable, but the description does not mention exclusions or contrast with sibling tools. Usage is implied by the name and action rather than explained.

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