Retrieve a catalog of Power Query transformations (unpivot, pivot, group_by, merge, filter) with their parameters to guide apply_transform.
Catalog of guided actions for apply_transform (unpivot, pivot, group_by, merge, filter, types, ...) with their params.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool provides a catalog with params, which is useful context, but it does not describe return format, ordering, or any other behavioral details. This is acceptable for a read-only list tool given the annotation.
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, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then provides clarifying examples. Every element earns its place, and there is 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?
Given the tool's simplicity—no parameters, no output schema, and a clear read-only role—the description is nearly complete. It names the associated sibling apply_transform and gives concrete examples of what the catalog contains. A brief mention of how the returned catalog might be used would make it fully complete, but it is not essential.
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 and 100% schema coverage, so there is no parameter documentation burden on the description. The mention of 'their params' refers to the transforms' parameters, not the tool's own arguments, which is fine. Baseline 4 applies because no parameters need semantic clarification.
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 identifies this tool as a catalog of guided actions for apply_transform, naming example transforms like unpivot, pivot, and group_by. This distinguishes it from apply_transform itself, which presumably performs the transform. A slightly stronger verb like 'lists' would make it explicit, but the intent is unambiguous.
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 the tool is used when you need to discover available transforms and their parameters for apply_transform. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. The usage context is inferable from the sibling relationship but not directly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.