pbi_export_page_html

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the output content (layout + visual fields) and that the page must exist, but does not clarify whether 'export' returns an HTML string, writes a file, requires an open project, or has any side effects.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence with a parenthetical clarification. No wasted words.

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?

The tool has one parameter with no schema description and no annotations, and the description does not compensate by explaining parameter format or usage. Although the output schema exists, the input side remains under-specified, and the presence of many sibling page-related tools makes the missing usage guidance more costly.

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%, leaving the single 'page' parameter undocumented. The description only says the page must be 'existing,' giving a vague hint that it identifies a current page, but it does not specify whether the value is a name, ID, or page number.

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 a specific action (export), a specific output (HTML mockup), and the target resource (existing page), with a parenthetical defining scope (layout + fields of each visual). It distinguishes from sibling tools that preview or generate specs by emphasizing 'existing page.'

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. The phrase 'existing page' implies use for current pages rather than creating new ones, but no explicit exclusions or references to related tools such as pbi_list_report_pages or pbi_preview_spec_html.

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