sf_query_org_paginated

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'explicit nextRecordsUrl support', which hints at pagination behavior but does not explain whether it automatically pages through results, how maxRecords interacts, or any rate limits or side effects. Significant ambiguity remains about the tool's actual behavior.

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 sentence of 8 words, perfectly front-loaded with the core action and purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations) and the context of many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not mention return format, pagination semantics (auto vs manual), or the role of directory/targetOrg, leaving critical usage gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only clarifies 'nextRecordsUrl', while neglecting pageSize, maxRecords, directory, and targetOrg. The parameter names are somewhat self-evident, but ambiguous ones like 'directory' are not explained.

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 verb 'Run', the resource 'SOQL queries', and the specific aspect 'paginated' with 'explicit nextRecordsUrl support'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sf_query_org or sf_search_org, which likely handle non-paginated or search queries.

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?

The description implies usage for paginated queries and nextRecordsUrl handling, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over sf_query_org or other query tools. It lacks direct guidance on alternatives or exclusions, so usage context is only implied.

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