Salesforce MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation), which aligns with 'Update'. The description adds context about partial updates ('Only include fields you want to change') and the return behavior ('Returns HTTP 204 on success'), but doesn't cover permissions, rate limits, or error handling.

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?

Two sentences and an example are front-loaded with essential information, with no wasted words; the example efficiently illustrates usage without redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, the description covers purpose and basic behavior but lacks details on error cases, authentication, or integration with sibling tools, leaving 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'data' parameter's purpose ('fields you want to change') and providing an example with concrete values, though it doesn't detail 'object_name' or 'record_id' formats beyond the example.

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 ('Update'), resource ('fields on an existing Salesforce record'), and scope ('Only include fields you want to change'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_record (creates new) and delete_record (removes).

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 usage for modifying existing records and provides an example, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like create_record or delete_record, or prerequisites like authentication needs.

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