pbi_export_active_theme

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

The description explains the tool writes a copy to output_path and references internal fields (activeTheme, themeCollection). With no annotations, this provides good behavioral context, though it could mention whether it overwrites files or requires specific permissions.

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 that are front-loaded with the primary action. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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 description covers the tool's purpose and main parameters. It does not mention return values, but an output schema exists. For a simple tool with two parameters, it is nearly complete.

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 explain both parameters. It implicitly describes output_path ('Writes... to output_path') and hint at extract_folder ('from an extracted report'), but extract_folder is not clearly defined. The description does not fully compensate for missing schema details.

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 action (export), the resource (active theme JSON), and the source (extracted report). It specifies the fallback logic (activeTheme or last in themeCollection) and distinguishes from sibling tools like pbi_apply_theme or pbi_validate_theme.

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 provides a clear use case: 'capturing the baseline theme before customising it.' However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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