pbi_create_calculated_column

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

The annotations are all false, so they provide no safety hints. The description adds important behavioral context by disclosing that the tool writes to TMDL and requires the project to be closed in Power BI Desktop. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether overwriting is destructive or what side effects occur beyond the TMDL write.

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 concise and structured across three short sentences. The first sentence gives the purpose, and the subsequent sentences clarify key parameters and a critical prerequisite. It is not overly verbose, though it could benefit from clearer separation of parameter details.

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 the tool's complexity (11 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotation hints), the description is incomplete. It covers the core purpose and two parameter semantics, plus a prerequisite, but does not explain the return value/output, the remaining parameters, or the broader model modification implications. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and side effects.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate. It explains two parameters (data_type and summarize_by) with meaningful detail, but there are 11 parameters total. It does not describe the required parameters table, name, and expression in detail, nor the optional ones like overwrite, is_hidden, format_string, and display_folder. This leaves many parameters without adequate semantic guidance.

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 calculated column (DAX) in a table of the .pbip model, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pbi_create_measure and pbi_create_calculated_table by specifying 'column' and the model context.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like pbi_create_measure or pbi_create_calculated_table. It does provide a key usage constraint—the project must be closed in Power BI Desktop—which gives some guidance on prerequisites, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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