resolve_fabric_ids

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the core conversion behavior but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. The non-destructive nature is implied but not clearly disclosed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb, and every word serves a purpose. No waste or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple and the description covers purpose and usage, but there are gaps: parameter semantics are not explained and the return behavior is not described beyond 'display names.' The output schema exists but is not referenced or enriched. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage. The description mentions GUIDs and URLs, but it does not map workspace_id or model_id to specific URL components or explain what model_id (the optional parameter) is for. Users are left to guess parameter meaning.

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 uses a specific verb 'Turn' and clearly states the resource: GUIDs in a Fabric URL converted to display names. It distinguishes this as a resolver tool from sibling tools like inspect_model or show_measure.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the user pastes a Fabric Studio link instead of typing names.' It does not mention when not to use or list alternatives besides the implied direct-name input, so it falls short of a 5.

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