Describe Object Schema

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), the description discloses important behavioral traits: it uses the REST Describe API, can return only fields with fieldsOnly, and includes a retry mechanism when waitForFields is used due to Salesforce-side schema cache lag. This is substantive context not available from annotations.

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 main description is concise and front-loaded, but the parameter explanations become somewhat lengthy, especially waitForFields. However, each sentence provides valuable context and none is redundant, so it remains well structured.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the response contains, when to use it, and parameter-specific edge cases. It also explains the fieldsOnly and waitForFields behaviors, making the tool self-sufficient for an agent.

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?

Although the input schema already covers all parameters (100%), the description adds meaningful context: fieldsOnly's performance rationale, waitForFields detailed explanation about Salesforce cache lag and retry behavior, and timeoutSeconds default/max. This goes beyond schema descriptions, though the schema itself also carries clear 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 tool 'Retrieves schema metadata for a Salesforce object via the REST Describe API' and enumerates the specific data returned (fields, child relationships, record type info). This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like sf_get_field_permissions or sf_query_records.

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 advises when to use the tool: 'Call this before querying or creating records on an unfamiliar object, or when a user asks what fields exist on an object.' This provides clear contextual guidance and differentiates from alternatives without ambiguity.

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