pbi_create_bookmark

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

Description discloses that the tool writes the bookmark file and updates the index, warns that Power BI won't show the bookmark without the index, and mentions the return value ('usage'). This adds behavioral context beyond the annotations, which already indicate a non-read-only operation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a compact paragraph that front-loads the purpose, then explains side effects, param hints, and return value. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 9 parameters and a mutation operation, the description covers the core purpose and key side-effects but omits several parameter semantics (e.g., overwrite, suppress_data). The output schema likely documents the return value, but parameter gaps reduce completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the burden. It explains `page`, `filters`, and `target_visuals` with useful detail, but leaves `display_name` (required), `overwrite`, `name`, `request_id`, `suppress_data`, and `suppress_display` unexplained. This is a partial compensation, not complete.

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 tool creates a bookmark ('Crea un marcador') and defines what a bookmark is (a report state to return to via a button). It distinguishes from siblings like pbi_list_bookmarks and pbi_delete_bookmark by describing the creation and index-writing behavior.

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 clear context for when to use the tool by explaining the creation workflow and the dependency on the index, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. The context is sufficient to infer this is the creation tool among bookmark-related siblings.

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