execute_dax_local

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful policy behavior: default blocking of raw table dumps (EVALUATE 'Table' / ALL()) and PII-blocklisted columns, plus an aggregate-only policy that caps rows at 200. It stops short of stating read-only nature, permissions, or failure behavior, but the policy disclosure is substantive.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the parameter bullets are terse and scannable. Each line earns its place, with only mild verbosity in the max_rows policy caveat.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the policy constraints and parameter sourcing. Remaining gaps are secondary details like pagination or error semantics for a query tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it documents all four parameters with concrete examples and semantics: port example ('51234'), dax_query form ('EVALUATE SUMMARIZECOLUMNS(...)'), and max_rows default/interaction with policy and the meaning of 0. Only model_id is described by reference rather than format.

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 ('execute') and resource ('a DAX query') scoped to 'the open Power BI Desktop report'. The word 'local'/Desktop implicitly separates it from the sibling execute_dax_service, but it never names that alternative explicitly, so the differentiation is left to inference.

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 useful context, notably that model_id must be obtained from list_local_reports, which chains this tool correctly. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over execute_dax_service or what conditions would make the sibling preferred.

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