Power BI auth status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool reads and does not expose tokens, but does not specify the return format, possible values of auth mode, or error conditions. Adequate for a simple read-only status tool but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded with the action ('Show'), and contains no extraneous words. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose and safety guarantee.

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?

For a parameterless status check tool, the description covers the core purpose and a key behavioral trait (no token exposure). However, it does not describe the return value format or possible values, which could be useful. Overall adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is fully covered (100%). The description adds context about the tool's behavior (no token exposure) but no parameter semantics are needed. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 'shows which Power BI authentication mode is configured', with the added safety note 'without exposing tokens', distinguishing it from sibling tools that may expose tokens. This is a specific verb+resource combination.

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 implies the tool is safe to use (no token exposure) and can be used to check configured auth mode, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus sibling tools like 'start_device_login' or 'complete_device_login'. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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