sf_update

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It explains the PATCH behavior (only provided fields changed) and the return value ({updated: true}). However, it omits critical details like error responses, required permissions, or record existence 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?

The description is extremely concise: a single sentence summarizing the action, three illustrative examples, and a clear return value. Every element is necessary and front-loaded, with no extraneous content.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description provides the essential usage pattern and return format. It lacks details on validation, errors, or side effects, but covers the core functionality adequately for a straightforward update tool.

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 descriptions already cover the parameters (object API name, record Id, field-value pairs). The description adds value through concrete examples showing typical usage with different data types, and clarifies the PATCH semantics (only provided fields changed), which enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 action ('Update a Salesforce record by Id') and the HTTP method (PATCH), distinguishing it from sibling tools like sf_create (create) and sf_delete (delete). Examples further reinforce the purpose.

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 indicates when to use: updating existing records by Id, with partial field changes. It does not explicitly exclude creation or other actions, but the context from sibling names and the verb 'Update' make usage clear.

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