salesforce_dml_records

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 disclosing behavior. It mentions the operations but omits critical traits such as the irreversibility of delete, required permissions, or potential bulk API limits. The lack of any cautionary or side-effect information leaves an agent under-informed.

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 concise and well-structured: it opens with a clear purpose, lists operations as bullet points, and concludes with practical examples. No unnecessary words or technical jargon are present, making it easily scannable.

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?

While the description includes examples, it omits important usage constraints such as the requirement that delete operations only need the record Id, or that upsert requires an external ID field. Given the tool's multiple modes, an agent would need more context to use it correctly in all scenarios.

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 schema description covers 100% of the parameters, and the descriptions are accurate but minimal. The externalIdField parameter is described as 'for upsert operations', which adds a slight clarification, but otherwise the descriptions do not go beyond the schema's own names and types (e.g., 'records' does not specify the required record format).

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 explicitly states 'Perform data manipulation operations on Salesforce records' and enumerates the four specific operations (insert, update, delete, upsert) with examples. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on querying, searching, or managing metadata.

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 provides practical examples like 'Insert new Accounts' and 'Update Case status', which hint at usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with siblings such as salesforce_query_records or salesforce_manage_object, nor does it state when not to use it (e.g., for read-only operations).

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