pbir_rename_bookmarkRename an existing Power BI bookmark by providing its bookmark ID and new display name, so report navigation labels stay clear and accurate.
Rename an existing bookmark.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bookmarkId | Yes | The bookmark ID to rename | |
| displayName | Yes | New display name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are minimal (openWorldHint=false), so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention what happens if the bookmarkId is invalid, any side effects, or required permissions.
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. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.
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?
For a simple rename operation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about the tool's relationship to other bookmark tools and any constraints (e.g., bookmark must exist).
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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 verb 'Rename' and the resource 'existing bookmark', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings like pbir_add_bookmark and pbir_delete_bookmark.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pbir_add_bookmark for creating), nor does it mention prerequisites or post-conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.