pbi_detect_empty_visuals

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

With no annotations, the description must fully cover behavioral traits. It mentions 'lightweight DAX probes' but omits side effects, prerequisites (e.g., extract_folder), or any mutation potential. The description is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it sacrifices essential detail. It is not well-structured to front-load key information.

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 tool has 5 parameters and an output schema, the description is far from complete. It fails to explain inputs, output, or how results relate to detecting empty visuals.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain any parameter. Critical parameters like 'extract_folder' are left undefined, forcing the agent to guess their meaning.

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 purpose: detecting visuals with no data using DAX probes. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling 'pbi_detect_missing_visuals', which could cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. Sibling tools like 'pbi_detect_missing_visuals' exist, but the description offers no comparative context or usage constraints.

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