set_stop_folding

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the core behavior ('prevent the M engine folding any further operations') and what it does ('Appends Table.StopFolding to the table's M query'). However, it does not mention side effects, whether repeated applications accumulate, reversibility, or required permissions. The description gives the essential behavior but lacks deeper context.

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 long and front-loaded with the key phrase 'Power Query folding hint'. Every word contributes meaning, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's scope. It could add more detail without becoming bloated, but as written it is tight and to the point.

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 output schema, no annotations, and minimal parameter documentation. The description provides the core purpose and effect but lacks guidance on when to use it relative to siblings, parameter semantics, or potential side effects. For a mutating tool with three parameters, this is incomplete.

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 description coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate. It references the 'table's M query', which implies the 'table' parameter is the target, but it does not explain 'sessionId' or the optional 'partitionName' beyond what the schema already provides. The description adds minimal value for parameter understanding.

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: appends Table.StopFolding to a table's M query to prevent query folding. It specifies the verb ('append') and the resource ('the table's M query'), and explains the intent (prevent further folding). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from related sibling tools like 'value_nativequery_folding' or 'add_table_view_folding'.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need to prevent the M engine from folding further operations into the data source's native query. It provides a clear context but offers no explicit exclusions, prerequisites, or references to alternative tools. The usage guidance is present but not fully elaborated.

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