pbi_read_tmdl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full weight. It discloses read-only nature, the error case when view not opened, and that it does not open ribbon views. Gives architectural context (separate page from reportView). Minor omission: doesn't explicitly describe success response format, but can be inferred.

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?

Two dense sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with primary action, followed by essential caveats. Excellent structure.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, error behavior, and read-only nature. Lacks explicit success response but is mostly complete.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters; description does not need to add semantics. Baseline of 4 applies as no information is missing.

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 action (read), the target (TMDL view editor text), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbi_read_dax_editor by emphasizing it's a separate page and requires prior opening. No tautology.

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 explains when to use (to read TMDL view text) and when it fails (if view never opened), and instructs to open the tab first. It does not explicitly mention alternatives but the context is clear.

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