No, nothing prevents you from making those rules. As I said earlier, this committee can recommend to the House any kind of definition for what you feel a harassment situation would be, but it is really up to the House itself to decide.
However, when coming up with a definition, you have to think also of all the permutations or situations that members are faced with in the course of a normal debate. You might be dealing with the extreme cases, which you want to cover, but any kind of definition would become an imposition on the behaviour of members. This is fine but it could also curtail certain situations that right now are part of the normal life of parliamentarians—debating, arguing, sometimes getting angry, and those kinds of things.
A definition would have to take into account its consequences on the free speech that members also expect to be able to exercise.