pbi_disable_auto_date_time

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

The description discloses the side effect of disabling: Power BI removes automatic date tables (LocalDateTable_*) when reopening the .pbip, lightening the model. With annotations all false and unhelpful, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does so adequately.

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 front-loaded with the main action, followed by a practical benefit and a prerequisite. Each sentence adds value without unnecessary 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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers scope ('solo modo pbip'), prerequisite, and a key side effect. It does not describe enabling behavior in detail, but the essential operational context is present.

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 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain the 'enabled' or 'request_id' parameters. The word 'Activa/desactiva' implicitly maps to the boolean 'enabled', but the request_id parameter is completely unaddressed, requiring the agent to infer its purpose.

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 activates/deactivates 'Auto fecha y hora' in pbip mode, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by addressing a unique setting that no other tool mentions.

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 provides clear context: 'solo modo pbip' and 'Requiere proyecto .pbip activo' indicate when to use the tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope and prerequisite are well defined.

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