Lists indexed Salesforce Architect documentation sections with page counts and titles. Optionally filter by section name and language code.
List all indexed sections with page counts and titles. Optionally filter to a specific section.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | No | Optional: filter to a specific section name. | |
| language | No | Language short code (e.g. 'en', 'it', 'de'). Default: 'en'. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, whether pagination applies, or what the output structure looks like for multiple sections. Only the filter behavior is implied.
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?
A single efficient sentence front-loads the main action and appends the optional filter. Every clause earns its place with no 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 simple two-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but omits return format, sorting, and pagination behavior. These gaps are modest given the tool's simplicity but leave some ambiguity.
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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only that the section filter is optional, which the schema also indicates. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a clear verb (List) and resource (indexed sections) plus what is returned (page counts and titles). It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_section_summary or export_architect_section, which also touch sections.
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 mentions an optional section filter but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_section_summary or search_architect_docs. No when-not or alternative routing is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.