report_clone

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

The annotations only say the operation is not read-only and not destructive, leaving the description responsible for clarifying side effects. The description merely restates 'Clone a report' and does not disclose that a new report is created, that the source report remains unchanged, or any permission requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action directly. 'via the Power BI API' is mildly redundant but harmless; overall the text is concise, though its brevity leaves behavioral substance underexplained.

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?

This clone tool has no output schema, so the description should clarify what the call returns and what side effects occur, especially when cloning across workspaces or models. It explains neither the postconditions nor the meaning of the optional parameters beyond what the schema already states, leaving an agent to guess at success behavior.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, all five parameters are already documented in the input schema, including the default behavior for targetWorkspaceId. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema carries the burden adequately.

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 uses the specific verb 'Clone' and identifies the resource as 'a report,' so the core action is clear. It is distinct from sibling report tools like report_get or report_rebind, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from alternative clone-like workflows.

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 no guidance on when to use report_clone versus report_get_definition plus report_create_definition or other report tools. It also omits any context about prerequisites, such as source workspace/report IDs, or when targetWorkspaceId and targetModelId should be supplied.

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