Create Salesforce Workflow Field Update Action

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it creates an action and sets a field to a literal, formula, or null, providing contextual behavior. However, it does not disclose potential caveats like required permissions or metadata component creation, though annotations diminish the need for that.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action verb, and every word adds value. No redundant or inflated 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 8-parameter schema and good annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and value options. It does not explain return values (no output schema) or prerequisites, but this is acceptable for a straightforward create operation with detailed schema descriptions.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful grouping by stating that the field can be set to 'a literal value, formula result, or null', which directly maps to the parameters literalValue, formula, and nullValue. This enriches parameter understanding beyond the individual schema descriptions.

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: 'Creates a Workflow Field Update action that can be referenced by Approval Processes, Workflow Rules, or Flows.' This is a specific verb+resource, and it also mentions the value-setting behavior (literal, formula, null). It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'sf_create_field_update', but the mention of referencing contexts provides some distinction.

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 implies usage context by noting the action can be referenced by Approval Processes, Workflow Rules, or Flows, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sf_create_field_update or sf_create_workflow_rule. The guidance is embedded but not explicit.

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