Describe a Salesforce object

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that includePicklists defaults to false to keep output small, which is a behavioral trait. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state read-only status, error behavior, or rate limits. It adds moderate transparency beyond the schema.

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 key output and immediately followed by practical guidance. Zero filler; every word contributes.

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 describe tool with no output schema and no annotations, it adequately explains what is returned and why to use it. It does not mention tooling API or error handling, but those are covered by parameter descriptions. It provides enough for an agent to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds extra context for includePicklists (default false to keep output small), which enriches parameter understanding. It also implicitly explains the purpose of the sobject parameter by framing the tool as a metadata getter.

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 (get metadata) and the resource (sObject), listing specific metadata types (field names, types, labels, picklist values, flags). It also distinguishes itself from siblings like sf_list_objects and sf_soql_query by framing its use as a prerequisite for SOQL and payload building.

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 states when to use it ('Essential before writing SOQL or building a record payload'), giving clear context for invocation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use-case guidance is strong enough for an agent to choose it over sibling query/list tools.

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