Create Role Hierarchy (Bulk)

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is write-oriented, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, such as how roles affect record visibility ('Roles control record visibility — users in higher roles see records owned by subordinate-role users') and the bulk 'single call' behavior.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: it starts with the core action, adds important conceptual context, then lists the parameters in a clean, readable format. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

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 simplicity of the tool (one input parameter, no output schema), the description is complete: it covers purpose, usage context, and parameter semantics. It could optionally mention conflict behavior with existing roles, but the annotations cover idempotency, and the lack of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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 schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the schema's parameter details (fullName, name, parentRole, description) and adds an example API name ('VP_Sales'), but this is marginal extra value rather than significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Creates multiple Salesforce roles in the role hierarchy in a single call.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing the bulk aspect ('Use to set up an entire hierarchy at once'), which separates it from the singular sf_create_role tool.

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 a clear usage context: 'Use to set up an entire hierarchy at once.' This tells the agent when to choose this tool over a single-role creation tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for single-role creation.

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