set_detail_row_visibility

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool sets visibility and optionally uses a toggle, but does not disclose side effects, whether visibility overrides or merges, or any permission requirements. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loading the primary action with no redundant or extraneous words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose and optional behavior.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and is a mutation, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain critical parameter details or behavioral constraints, leaving significant gaps for an agent to safely use the tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'toggle_textbox' and part of 'tablix_name' context, but 'path' and 'expression' are not described. 'Expression' likely expects a boolean but is ambiguous, and 'path' is unclear. The description adds limited value over the raw schema.

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 sets visibility on the tablix's Details group with optional toggle, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from restructuring row hierarchy but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling visibility tools like set_group_visibility, though the specific mention of 'Details group' provides adequate clarity.

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 says 'Use to hide detail rows by expression without restructuring the row hierarchy,' implying when to use and when not to, but it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit exclusions. The context is clear but could be more specific.

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