connect_model

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It discloses the risk of omitting the port ('a guess, not a guarantee') and clearly states the tool's interactive-only nature. It does not explicitly mention failure behavior if no model is open, but the interactive attach context is well covered.

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 two sentences, with the critical safety warning front-loaded. Every clause earns its place: purpose, scope, return value, and a key caveat. No redundant or fluff 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?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the interaction model, the return value (sessionId), the port behavior, and the constraint regarding unattended pipelines. No essential context is missing.

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%, providing a solid baseline. The description adds value by elaborating on the consequence of omitting the port ('which is a guess, not a guarantee'), which goes beyond the schema's neutral description. This extra context aids correct usage.

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 states a specific verb ('connects to') and a specific resource ('Power BI Desktop model'), and clearly distinguishes this tool from its siblings by noting it is 'interactive attach only' and returns a sessionId. It explicitly defines the scope (human-open model) and differentiates it from unattended alternatives.

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 explicitly warns 'UNSAFE-FOR-PIPELINE (interactive attach only)' and states that unattended jobs must launch their own Desktop instead. This provides clear when-not-to-use guidance and an alternative approach, which is central to proper tool selection.

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