Guide

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds transparency about live discovery from skills/*.md files, informing the agent that topics are dynamically sourced. No destructive behavior is implied, and there is no contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately provide actionable usage. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: domain, live discovery, and listing capability. It is complete enough for the agent to understand how to invoke it, though it could optionally mention the expected response format.

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?

The input schema already describes the 'topic' parameter with a description. The tool description adds the crucial usage example of passing 'list' to enumerate topics, which goes beyond the schema's definition and enhances parameter understanding.

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 defines the tool as providing domain knowledge for Power BI report development, with a specific mention of live discovery from skills/*.md files. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on specific actions like setting page visibility or renaming bookmarks.

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 explicit guidance on how to list available topics using topic:'list', which aids in initial discovery. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, relying on contrasting sibling tool purposes.

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