Salesforce MCP Server

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

The annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond this: it explains the SOSL syntax format, provides a concrete example, specifies wildcard behavior (* and ?), and mentions the minimum 2-character requirement. These are operational details not covered by annotations.

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 efficiently structured with clear sections: purpose statement, syntax format, usage guidelines, example, and technical details. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. The information is front-loaded with the core purpose first.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with read-only annotation but no output schema, the description provides excellent context about what the tool does, how to use it, and what to expect. The main gap is lack of information about return format or result structure, but given the annotations cover safety and the description covers usage thoroughly, it's mostly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for the single 'search' parameter, the description compensates well by explaining what the parameter should contain: it shows the full SOSL syntax pattern, provides an example with {Acme} placeholder, and explains wildcard usage. This gives meaningful context about parameter content beyond just being a string.

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's purpose with specific verb ('Search') and resource ('multiple Salesforce objects by keyword using full-text search'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying it's for SOSL search across multiple objects, unlike run_soql_query which is for structured filtering.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('when you don't know which object contains the data, or need to search across Account, Contact, Lead, Opportunity simultaneously') and when to use an alternative ('Use run_soql_query instead for structured filtering'). This gives clear context for tool selection.

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