List Salesforce objects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses that this is a global describe and specifies the returned fields (name, label, key prefix), but it does not mention pagination, performance implications, or any filtering behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Three short sentences each carry distinct value: what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use a sibling tool. The information is front-loaded and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the key return shape and the main alternative. It could mention how search interacts with the global describe, but that is already covered by the input schema, so the description is largely 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters search and tooling are already documented. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter usage, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('the sObjects in the org'), and the method ('global describe'). It also differentiates itself from the sibling tool sf_describe_object by noting the tools covers listing vs. field-level detail, making the tool's purpose 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 provides explicit guidance to use sf_describe_object when field-level detail is needed, giving the agent an alternative route. It does not mention exclusions or when to prefer other sibling list tools like sf_list_custom_objects, but the context is clear enough for this tool's scope.

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