sf_assign_permset_group

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning required permissions, side effects on user access, confirmation requirements (despite a 'confirm' parameter), or reversibility. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, making it immediately clear what the tool does. However, its brevity contributes to the lack of behavioral and parameter detail.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, mutation, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain key parameters like 'onBehalfOfUser' or 'confirm', and provides no context on when or how to use it safely. The description would not enable an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional knowledge.

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 has 5 parameters with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description only adds meaning to 'permissionSetGroupNames' via 'one or more', but fails to explain 'confirm', 'directory', 'targetOrg', and 'onBehalfOfUser'. The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Assign'), resource ('permission set groups'), and target ('a user in Salesforce'). The phrase 'one or more permission set groups' distinguishes it from the sibling sf_assign_permission_set, which likely handles single permission sets.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention the singular permission set assignment tool (sf_assign_permission_set) or removal tools, nor does it specify scenarios where this tool is preferred. With a clear sibling distinction available, this is a missed opportunity.

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