Delete a Salesforce record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is destructive and gated behind MC_NEXT_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true, which is critical behavior. However, it does not mention permanence/recoverability, required Salesforce permissions, or what response or error the caller should expect, leaving material behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences deliver the operation, the HTTP mapping, the destructive nature, and the environment variable gate with zero filler. The core verb and resource are front-loaded, and every clause 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 destructive mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description communicates the key gate and scope but omits return-value behavior and failure modes. An agent can attempt the call correctly, but it lacks information about success indication, 404 handling, and post-delete effects, so the description is only partially complete.

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?

The input schema already has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description's endpoint template {SObject}/{id} mirrors but does not enrich the schema. It adds no new meaning about id format, sobject naming, or the tooling flag beyond what the schema already provides.

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 precise verb-resource pair: 'Delete a single record', then reinforces it with the exact HTTP endpoint DELETE /sobjects/{SObject}/{id}. 'Single' explicitly distinguishes this tool from bulk delete siblings like sf_bulk_delete_records, and the endpoint makes the operation unambiguous.

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 gives clear usage context: this is for deleting a single Salesforce record, and it is only usable when MC_NEXT_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true. It does not name alternative sibling tools or explicitly state when not to use it, but the 'single record' scope plus the destructive guardrail provides enough guidance for correct selection in most cases.

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