sf_build_apex_cursor_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden but only states it 'builds templates', implying a code-generation action with no side effects. It does not disclose return format, whether it makes API calls, or any limitations. Lacks transparency about what the agent should expect when invoking it.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for the high-level purpose, though its brevity contributes to the low informational density. Structure is good but not exceptional.

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 (13 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely under-specified. It gives a high-level purpose but fails to explain what the generated templates look like, how to use them, or context around pagination and queueable skeletons. It is far from complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to any of the 13 parameters. It doesn't explain the difference between soqlQuery and objectName, the meaning of fetchSize, or when to set usePaginationCursor. The tool relies entirely on parameter names, which are insufficient for correct invocation.

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 builds SOQL and Apex cursor code templates, with a specific verb 'Build' and resource 'SOQL and Apex cursor code templates'. It distinguishes from execution-focused siblings like sf_execute_apex_cursor_query, though it lacks exact output details. Not a full 5 because 'cursor' and 'templates' could be more precisely defined.

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. It implies use for large-record processing, but doesn't mention related tools like sf_execute_apex_cursor_query or sf_execute_batch_job. No exclusions or prerequisite context provided.

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