export_tmdl

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'fully text and source-control-friendly' but fails to disclose that the output folder will be overwritten (only stated in the schema). It also does not clarify whether the operation is read-only or what side effects exist beyond writing files.

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 tightly written sentences deliver the core purpose immediately with no redundancy. The front-loaded verb and resource make it easy to scan, and every sentence contributes meaning.

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 tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description must provide essential context. It does explain the purpose and general use case, but leaves gaps around behavioral side effects, parameter semantics, and the expected return/output structure. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for the undocumented 'sessionId' parameter, but it does not mention it at all. The description also does not add meaning beyond the schema's note about 'outputFolder' being created/overwritten.

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 'Serialize the live model to TMDL text files' with a specific verb, resource, and output format. It also differentiates itself as 'the model half of a PBIP project,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like import_tmdl.

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 clear context: it is 'the foundation for generating projects without a live Power BI Desktop.' This implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of full guidance.

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