read_pbir

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it parses the entire definition tree into memory (resource implication), returns a summary and session ID, and requires the source to be closed. This is enough to set expectations, though it does not describe error behavior or session cleanup.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no fluff. Every clause adds important context: supported sources, behavior, return value, integration, and the closed-source requirement.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description compensates by explicitly stating the return contents (summary, session ID) and the tool's role in the pbir workflow. It covers the key context needed to invoke and use the tool effectively.

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 schema already describes the single parameter 'path' as an absolute path, and the description reinforces the accepted formats (.pbix or PBIP folder). With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3; the description adds marginal value by confirming the supported source types.

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 verb 'Open' with a specific resource (PBIR report from .pbix or PBIP folder) and its outcome: parse the definition tree and return a structured summary. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by highlighting the returned pbirSessionId and its role as a prerequisite for other pbir tools.

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?

It provides a concrete prerequisite ('The source must be CLOSED in Power BI Desktop') and explains its integration with other pbir tools ('reused by the other pbir tools'), which implies when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclude scenarios, but its role as an entry-point is clear.

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