Bulk create Salesforce records

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the one-call batch limit, the POST endpoint, allOrNone rollback semantics, and automatic splitting of larger inputs. It does not mention response shape or partial-success behavior when allOrNone is false, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 three tight sentences with no filler. The core action and limit are front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds valuable behavioral or parameter guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 moderately complex bulk operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main usage contract well: batch limits, rollback behavior, and automatic splitting. It is close to complete but does not describe what the call returns or how errors from split calls surface, which would make it fully self-contained.

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 100%, so the schema already documents sobject, records, and allOrNone. The description adds some context by calling records 'a field map' and explaining the allOrNone effect, but most of this is a restatement of what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create up to 200 records in one call (POST /composite/sobjects).' This clearly describes the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like sf_bulk_update_records and sf_bulk_delete_records by stating the action and endpoint. The bulk scope is explicit, so an agent won't confuse it with sf_create_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 clearly implies this is the bulk-create tool, and the 200-record cap plus automatic splitting tells an agent when its capacity is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as sf_create_record for single-record creates, nor does it state when not to use this tool, so it misses the explicit exclusion that would earn a 5.

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