Lists partitions per table, showing storage mode and source, for Power BI Desktop and .pbip projects.
Lista las particiones por tabla (modo de almacenamiento y origen).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | No | live |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the output includes storage mode and source, which is some transparency. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or clarify the behavior of the 'source' parameter (e.g., filtering by source), leaving gaps in behavioral understanding.
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 that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. It earns its place by stating the core purpose, though it offers no additional structure or tips.
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 output schema exists, so return values are likely covered, but the description lacks any explanation of the 'source' parameter and offers no usage context. For a tool with one optional parameter and no annotations, this level of detail is insufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly in all cases.
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 schema has 0% coverage, and the description does not explain the 'source' parameter. The word 'origen' in the description likely refers to an output field rather than the input parameter. No possible values or effects are described, leaving the agent to guess what 'source' accepts.
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 partitions by table, with storage mode and source. This is a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbi_list_tables (tables) and pbi_set_storage_mode (storage modes).
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring a selected model or a connection, nor does it contrast with similar list tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.