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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and non-open-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: the BUSINESS+ portfolios plan requirement, the org.portfolio.manage permission with MANAGER+ default, and the newest-first sort behavior. It does not discuss pagination or truncation, but the limit parameter's schema covers that.

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?

Four short sentences, each front-loaded with a distinct fact: what is returned, sort order, prerequisites, and where to use it. No filler or repeated information.

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?

For a read-only list tool with rich annotations, one fully documented parameter, and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: contents, sort, prerequisites, and when to call it. Nothing material is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, and the single limit parameter already documents its default (200) and max (500). The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, so the baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list portfolios) and adds the scope and returned fields (owner + project count), plus default sort order. It also names the sibling it feeds into (add_project_to_portfolio), so an agent can distinguish it from get_portfolio, portfolio_summary, or create_portfolio without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly says to use it before add_project_to_portfolio to discover candidate portfolios, and states the required plan feature and permission/default role. It gives clear positive context but does not spell out when-not to use it or name alternative discovery tools, so it falls short of the top bar.

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