pbi_list_relationships

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral nuances. It only states the output attributes but does not clarify whether the operation is read-only (though implied), what 'estado' refers to, how the 'source' parameter affects results, or any prerequisites. Minimal behavioral context is given.

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, compact sentence that quickly conveys the core purpose. However, it omits critical parameter context, so while concise, it is under-specified.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the tool has an undocumented parameter and lacks behavioral notes or usage guidance. For a list operation, the description provides only the bare minimum, leaving important aspects like source behavior and status semantics ambiguous.

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 sole parameter 'source' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and is not mentioned in the tool description. The agent is left without any semantic understanding of what values to pass or what 'live' means.

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 verb 'Lista' (Lists) with the resource 'relaciones' (relationships), and enumerates the key attributes returned (tables/columns, cardinality, cross-filter, status). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbi_create_relationship or pbi_set_relationship_direction.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives is provided. The context is implied by the name 'list_relationships', but there is no mention of when to prefer this over other relationship-related tools or any exclusions.

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