pbi_list_power_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. The description only says 'list,' implying read-only, but does not disclose any side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether results are paginated. This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 is too brief to be informative. It could include more detail about the parameter or output without becoming verbose, so it is mediocre.

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?

With only one parameter and an output schema available, the description is still incomplete. It does not explain the scope (e.g., all tables or specific), the output structure, or any nuances. The agent cannot fully understand the tool's behavior from the description alone.

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 mention the 'include_hidden' parameter. The agent must infer its meaning from the name alone, which is insufficient. The description should explain the parameter's effect, but it does not.

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 it lists table partitions and their source expressions. The verb 'list' and specific resource 'table partitions' and 'source expressions' make the purpose unambiguous, distinguishing it from siblings like pbi_get_power_query which retrieves a single query.

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 versus alternatives such as pbi_get_power_query or pbi_list_tables. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context that would help an agent decide to invoke this tool.

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