get_record

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'limit and pagination', which adds some behavioral context beyond basic retrieval, but it doesn't disclose critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what the return format looks like (especially without an output schema). This leaves significant gaps for a tool with mutation siblings.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Retrieve a specific Salesforce record by ID') and adds a concise note on 'limit and pagination'. There is no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and siblings include mutations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error cases, and how it fits into the broader toolset (e.g., vs. 'search_records'). Without annotations or output schema, more context is needed for effective use.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds minimal value by implying 'limit and pagination' relate to the 'limit' parameter, but it doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., how pagination works with a single 'record_id'). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('specific Salesforce record by ID'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'search_records' or 'soql_query', which might also retrieve records, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'search_records' or 'soql_query' from the sibling list. It mentions 'limit and pagination' but doesn't clarify if this is the preferred method for single-record lookups or when other tools might be more appropriate.

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