pbi_list_hierarchies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool lists, but does not mention whether it is read-only, has side effects, or any other behavioral traits. This is a transparency gap for a model inspection tool.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words, front-loading the key information about what the tool does.

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 is simple, and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, the unexplained 'source' parameter and lack of usage context make the description incomplete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 has one parameter 'source' with a default but no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The tool description does not explain this parameter at all, leaving the agent unsure of its meaning or valid values.

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 lists model hierarchies with their levels and columns, using the verb 'Lista' and the resource 'jerarquias del modelo'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbi_list_relationships and pbi_list_tables.

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 usage is implied by the tool's name and description: use it when you need model hierarchies. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over other listing tools or any exclusions/prerequisites.

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