sf_bulk_load

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

Without annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly discloses the mutating/destructive operations and some per-operation requirements, but it does not mention asynchronous Bulk API job behavior, polling, rate limits, partial success, or failure semantics. Some behavioral context is present, but meaningful gaps remain.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. The when-to-use guidance and operation-specific constraints are tightly packed without repetition.

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 bulk write operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks important contextual details such as asynchronous job handling, result retrieval, error behavior, and batch size considerations. It is sufficient for initial tool selection and basic invocation, but not fully complete for real-world Bulk API usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the operation values, that external_id_field is required for upsert, and that delete records only require an Id. This covers most parameters meaningfully, though sobject is not explicitly defined beyond the overall batch-records context.

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 states a clear, specific action: insert/update/upsert/delete a batch via Bulk API 2.0. It names the resource type (records) and differentiates itself from one-record-at-a-time sibling tools like sf_create_record and sf_update_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 explicitly says when to use this tool: for record volumes too large for the one-record-per-call REST endpoints. It names the alternatives and provides operation-specific conditions such as external_id_field being required for upsert and delete records needing only an Id key.

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