salesforce_manage_object

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It states that changes affect metadata and require permissions, but does not disclose side effects, consequences of updates (overwrite vs additive), error behavior, or rate limits. Minimal behavioral insight beyond the obvious.

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 brief, using bullet points and an example, and front-loads the main action. It is efficient, though could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating create and update clearly).

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?

The tool has 9 parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success message, error handling) or provide deeper context about metadata operations beyond permissions. Lacks completeness for a complex metadata tool.

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 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description groups parameters under create/update lists but adds little new meaning beyond the schema, e.g., mentioning 'fields, relationships, and settings' without elaboration.

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 creates or modifies custom objects in Salesforce, listing specific operations (create, update) and providing examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like salesforce_manage_field.

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 includes a note about metadata changes and permissions, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like salesforce_manage_field or when not to use it. No exclusions or context for selection.

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