pbi_audit_report_only

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the specific audit categories, giving the agent a clear picture of what will be inspected without contradicting the read-only hint.

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: the first establishes the tool's narrow purpose, the second lists the exact audit areas. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given zero parameters and a read-only annotation, the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior and scope. The output schema (present) handles return value details, so the description need not elaborate further.

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 tool accepts no parameters, so the description inherently covers all input needs; no parameter semantics are required.

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 it audits only the PBIR report, excluding semantic model rules, and lists specific audit checks (empty pages, visuals without title, broken fields, duplicates, canvas sizes, page geometry). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like pbi_audit_model.

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?

It explicitly says 'solo el informe PBIR (sin las reglas del modelo semantico)' indicating the tool is scoped to report-only audits, providing clear context for when to use it. It doesn't name alternative tools but its scope exclusion is evident.

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