bind_dynamic_title

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It reveals a key side effect ('title show is forced on') and a prerequisite, but does not address reversibility, existing title formatting, or error conditions. This provides some transparency but leaves gaps.

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 concise and front-loaded, consisting of three focused sentences. Every sentence adds crucial information: the binding action, the prerequisite, and parameter syntax. There is no wasted text.

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 description is reasonably complete for a binding operation with a clear purpose and prerequisite. It omits details about return values or error handling, but given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the provided context is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the titleMeasure syntax ('Table[Measure]') and the alternative with titleMeasureTable. It reinforces how page and visual resolve, which is already in the schema but the description clarifies the intended usage patterns.

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's function: binding a visual's title to a text measure. It specifies the effect ('becomes the title text and title show is forced on') and distinguishes from siblings like set_visual_title by focusing on expression-based titles and referencing add_dynamic_title_measure as a prerequisite.

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 gives explicit usage context: it should be used after authoring a text measure with add_dynamic_title_measure, and it clarifies page/visual resolution. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the prerequisite and focus on dynamic measures imply when this tool is appropriate.

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