pbi_list_convertible_pbix

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

The description adds behavioral detail beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it does not open Desktop, examines each file, and reports whether each report would be copied (already in PBIR) or needs translation, and whether Desktop is required for model extraction. This is consistent with the annotation and clarifies the non-destructive preview nature.

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 tight and well-structured: a one-sentence summary, a brief behavioral explanation, and concise parameter documentation. No redundant or filler content.

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?

With an output schema present, the description adequately covers the tool's scope: it lists files, provides per-file conversion decisions, explains path/recursive semantics, and gives the preview context. It is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, but the description fully compensates by explaining `path` as a folder or a single .pbix file, and `recursive` as including subfolders. This provides clear semantic meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 lists .pbix files in a folder and predicts conversion status for each, and explicitly calls itself 'la vista previa del lote' (the preview of the batch), distinguishing it from the conversion tool pbi_convert_pbix_to_pbip.

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 by describing this as the preview step before batch conversion and notes it runs 'sin abrirlos en Desktop' (without opening them in Desktop), implying usage for safe pre-conversion assessment. However, it does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use it.

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