Create Messaging Channel

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

The description explains routing behavior ('route to a queue' or 'route to an Einstein Bot first') and conditional parameter requirements, which adds value beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose behavior related to the idempotentHint annotation, such as whether creating an existing channel overwrites or fails.

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 well-organized with line breaks per parameter and no redundant prose. Every sentence adds information, though the incorrect enum lists waste some space and reduce reliability.

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 complexity (9 parameters, 2 enums, no output schema), the description covers many important aspects: channel types, phone format, routing logic, and a post-create step. However, it omits the 'None' routingType option and fails to clarify idempotent behavior or expected outcome, leaving gaps for an agent selecting and invoking the 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?

The description adds useful parameter context: E.164 format for phoneNumber, pageId purpose, and conditional requirements for queueName/botName. Yet it directly conflicts with the schema enum: it lists 'AppleBusinessChat', 'EinsteinBotChannel', and 'WebChat' (not in schema), omits 'Voice' and 'EmbeddedMessaging', and says routingType is 'Queue or Bot' while the schema includes 'None'. This is misleading and likely to cause invocation errors.

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 'Creates a Messaging Channel for Salesforce digital engagement' and enumerates the channel types it covers, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like sf_create_service_channel. However, the channelType list in the description diverges from the schema enum, creating slight ambiguity about the exact scope.

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 gives a contextual use case ('for Salesforce digital engagement') and a follow-up step ('After creating, configure the channel with sf_create_embedded_service'), implying when to use it. It does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, leaving the when-not-to-use guidance absent.

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