pbi_read_tmdl_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'read,' implying a non-destructive operation, but lacks details about prerequisites, side effects, or authentication needs. The transparency is minimal.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action. Every word is relevant, and there is no superfluous content.

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's simplicity (2 required params, output schema present), the description is adequate for a basic understanding. However, the lack of parameter details and behavioral context means it is not fully complete, especially for an agent encountering this tool for the first time.

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%, and the description does not explain the parameters (project_path, relative_file). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but without any additional context from the description, the agent may not know the required format or constraints. The description entirely fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 reads one TMDL file from a Power BI Project definition folder. It uses a specific verb ('read') and resource ('TMDL file'), and among siblings like pbi_list_tmdl_files and pbi_write_tmdl_file, it distinguishes itself as a read operation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, pbi_list_tmdl_files could be used to list available files before reading, but no such advice is given. The description is minimal and does not help the agent decide between tools.

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