pbi_baseline

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

The description discloses default behavior (pages defaults to current, ["*"] captures all) and output location. However, it does not explain whether compare overwrites the existing baseline, what happens if the name already exists, or if the tool requires prior capture. No annotations exist to supplement this.

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 extremely concise: three short lines covering the three actions with per-action details. It is front-loaded with the core verbs ('Capture / compare / list') and avoids any extraneous information.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description provides a solid overview of the tool's purpose, actions, and key parameters. It is nearly complete but could mention whether name is required for capture/compare and potential overwrite behavior.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential meaning: it defines 'capture', 'compare', and 'list' actions; explains pages formatting (default current, ["*"] all); and indicates name is used in the output filename. However, it does not fully clarify whether name is required for capture/compare or its permissible values.

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 captures, compares, or lists value baselines. It specifies exactly what is stored (cards, badges, visibleVisualCount) per page, and differentiates the three actions (capture, compare, list) with distinct behaviors.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., pbi_snapshot, pbi_read_cards). The context of baselines (e.g., for regression testing) is implied but not explicit, and there is no mention of prerequisites or 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.