Create Search Layout

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

The description discloses the create/update behavior, consistent with the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It does not add extra details such as permission requirements or whether updating replaces existing field lists, but with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the bar is lower and additional context is limited.

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 front-loaded with the main action and purpose in two sentences, followed by a clear parameter list. It is well-structured and free of redundancy, though the parameter list somewhat duplicates the schema descriptions, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so return-value descriptions are unnecessary. It covers all four parameters and explains the three categories of field placements. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit update semantics (merge vs replace), but for an idempotent, non-destructive write operation, the description is largely complete.

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%, and the description largely mirrors the schema descriptions, e.g., objectName example and searchResultsAdditionalFields description. It adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states it 'Creates or updates a SearchLayout' for a Salesforce object, specifying the exact resource and action. It further details what the layout defines: fields in search results, lookup dialogs, and lookup filter fields, which distinguishes it from sibling layout tools like page layouts or compact layouts.

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?

It explicitly states 'Use to customize what columns users see when they search for records or open a lookup dialog,' providing clear when-to-use context. It does not name alternatives or give exclusions, but the intended use is unambiguous and well-differentiated from other create tools.

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