list_measures

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation and 'with DAX' indicates the returned content, but it doesn't explicitly state that no modifications are made or describe any other side effects, prerequisites, or response details.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately identifies the action and output. Every word earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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 simple listing tool, the description communicates the core scope (whole model or one table) and the output content (measures with DAX). Since there is no output schema, it could be more explicit about the return format, but the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 50%: the table parameter is described in the schema, and the description echoes that it can limit to one table. However, the required sessionId parameter is not explained in either the schema or the description. The description adds marginal value over the schema but does not fully compensate for the undocumented sessionId.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('measures'), and clarifies the output includes DAX expressions. It also defines the scope ('whole model or one table'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_measure or delete_measure.

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 for when to use the tool: to list all measures or measures in a specific table. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope statement is sufficient for a simple listing operation.

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