pbi_document_report_layout

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

The annotations are all false (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc.), providing no safety or side-effect hints. The description only says it generates Markdown documentation but does not clarify whether this is a read-only operation, whether it writes files, or if it requires a specific report context. This lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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 single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and object. It includes the output format (Markdown) and scope (pages and visuals) without any unnecessary words.

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?

There is an output schema (as indicated by context signals), so return value details are covered. However, the description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., whether a report must be open) and the expected output structure. For a simple tool with no parameters, this is a moderate gap.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is empty. The description adds no parameter details, but this is acceptable because there are no parameters to explain. The baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies.

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 a specific action ('Genera documentacion Markdown') and a specific resource ('del layout del informe (paginas y visuales)'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbi_document_model, which focuses on the data model, and pbi_generate_technical_documentation, which covers broader documentation.

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 implies usage when report layout documentation is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. There is no mention of prerequisites or alternatives, making the guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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