pbi_detect_missing_visuals

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It explains the requirement entry structure but does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, or read-only behavior. Minimal depth for behavioral understanding.

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?

Description is short (2 sentences) and front-loaded with main action. The requirement structure is listed inline but clear. No unnecessary words.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But description omits details on 'extract_folder' and 'page' parameters, and lacks usage context. Adequate for basic understanding but incomplete given 3 required params and many siblings.

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 0% but description adds meaning to 'requirements' parameter by detailing its dict structure (visual_type, count, contains_field, label). However, 'extract_folder' and 'page' are not described. Partial compensation for low coverage.

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: 'Detect required visuals that are absent from a page.' It uses a specific verb ('detect') and resource ('required visuals'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'pbi_detect_empty_visuals'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'pbi_detect_empty_visuals' or 'pbi_describe_page'. No when-not-to-use or context for selection among many detection tools.

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