sf_run_apex_test_suite

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool runs Apex test suites, but does not disclose whether execution is synchronous, whether it waits for results, what side effects occur, or any authentication/visibility requirements.

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 filler or redundancy. While it is concise, it is also so terse that it omits important context, preventing a perfect score for structure.

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 has 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens when tests run, what the result looks like, or how parameters like wait and codeCoverage affect execution, leaving major gaps for an agent.

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 only adds the vague hint 'suite-first input' without explaining the meaning or usage of wait, directory, targetOrg, or codeCoverage. This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions.

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 identifies the action ('Run') and resource ('Apex test suites'), and the parenthetical 'suite-first input' distinguishes it from sibling sf_run_apex_test, which likely handles individual tests. However, it doesn't explicitly state what distinguishes it from all related tools, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 use when running Apex test suites, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like sf_run_apex_test or other testing utilities. No exclusions or alternative references are given.

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