salesforce-files-queries
Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Querying Salesforce Files. TRIGGER when: any ContentVersion or ContentDocumentLink query, counting files or building a file population, files that look missing or under-counted, or ERROR_HTTP_414 on a long IN list. An unfiltered ContentVersion sweep under-returns and its COUNT corroborates the wrong number.
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 52
If a file count came from a ContentVersion sweep, treat it as a floor rather than a total, and re-derive it from ContentDocumentLink before …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
salesforce-files-queries
Query files through ContentDocumentLink, never through a ContentVersion sweep. You need this once
you are already querying files, and the failure it prevents is a confidently wrong answer rather than
an error.
Point-in-time: measured on a Salesforce production org in 2026. Verify against your own org before asserting any of it as current fact.
An unfiltered sweep under-returns, and its COUNT agrees with the wrong number
SELECT ... FROM ContentVersion WHERE IsLatest = true, run with no other filter, silently returns
fewer rows than the org holds, and SELECT COUNT(Id) FROM ContentVersion WHERE IsLatest = true
returns the same short number.
The count corroborates nothing. Both queries travel the same access path, so a matching count reads as independent confirmation and is not. That is the whole trap: the natural way to sanity-check the sweep is the one check guaranteed to agree with it.
Measured: the sweep and its COUNT agreed exactly, while pulling the same files filtered by the
ContentDocumentId values gathered from ContentDocumentLink returned 99 additional rows. Those
99 are real, present, and IsLatest = true. A targeted WHERE ContentDocumentId IN (...) returns
them; the sweep does not.
What to do instead
- Drive file work from the links. Query
ContentDocumentLinkfor the records you care about (WHERE LinkedEntityId IN (...)), then pullContentVersionfiltered by the resultingContentDocumentIdvalues. Never take aContentVersionsweep as the population. - A gap between the two is not deleted files. That was the first theory here and it was wrong
twice:
ContentDocumentreturned every one of the supposedly missing ids, including under--all-rows. In that case the missing rows clustered into a single category of file, so the sweep did not just undercount, it made a whole category read as zero. Check what the missing rows have in common before theorizing about deletion. - Both queries need chunking, and the limit is the URI, not the SOQL. The CLI sends SOQL as a GET
parameter, so roughly 1,000 ids in an
INlist returnsERROR_HTTP_414: URI Too Longwhile 400 is comfortable.sf data queryhas no--bulkflag in the current CLI; it paginates a plain query itself, which is exactly what makes the unfiltered shortcut look attractive in the first place.
Reading the symptom
If a file count came from a ContentVersion sweep, treat it as a floor rather than a total, and
re-derive it from ContentDocumentLink before anyone acts on the number. The symptom that should send
you here is a category of file that reads as zero, or a total that is close to right and slightly low.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

