Add Portfolio Item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that it returns a success message and can control placement. This provides some behavioral context beyond the annotations, but it does not disclose details like what happens if the project is already in the portfolio, despite idempotentHint=true. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two short sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description adequately covers the operation. It mentions the return value and placement options. It could be more complete by noting that the operation is idempotent, but this is already in the annotations, so the description does not need to repeat it.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented with clear meanings. The description briefly mentions insert_before/insert_after but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('a project to a portfolio'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like asana_remove_portfolio_item and asana_get_portfolio_items. It also mentions optional placement control, which adds specificity.

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 context is clear: this tool adds a project to a portfolio, and the optional insert_before/insert_after parameters indicate placement customization. While it does not explicitly name alternatives, the sibling list makes the intended use obvious, and there are no misleading exclusions.

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