Update SObject Record

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations by explaining the partial update semantics: 'Only provided fields are changed — omitted fields retain their current values.' Annotations convey readOnly=false and destructive=false, but the description enriches this with field-level detail and the fact that it targets an existing record.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every word contributes. It clearly explains the what, how, and key behavior without any fluff.

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 simple update tool, the description is complete: it mentions the endpoint (Salesforce REST API), the required inputs, and the most important behavioral nuance (partial update). Although there is no output schema, the tool's purpose does not demand an elaborate return contract, and the description covers the essential invocation details.

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% as all three parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description essentially restates the schema parameter info ('Provide the object API name, the 15 or 18 character record ID, and the fields to update') without adding any new semantic detail beyond what is already structured.

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: 'Updates an existing SObject record by record ID via the Salesforce REST API.' It identifies the resource (SObject record), the verb (updates), and method (by record ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sf_create_record, sf_delete_record, and sf_upsert_record.

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 implies usage context by stating the need for an existing record ID and the partial-update behavior: 'Only provided fields are changed — omitted fields retain their current values.' However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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