portfolioList

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. 'List' and 'in the account' convey a read-only, account-scoped operation, but the description does not disclose authentication needs, pagination, or output structure.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. The API reference link is mildly redundant but does not detract from clarity.

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 zero-parameter list operation this is mostly sufficient, but because there is no output schema, the description does not state what portfolio fields or identifiers will be returned. The low complexity keeps this from being a major gap.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema already captures everything needed. Per the baseline for no-parameter tools, this is adequate and needs no additional parameter explanation.

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 ('List') and resource ('portfolios') and scopes it to 'the account.' This clearly distinguishes it from mutating portfolio siblings like portfolioAdd, portfolioDelete, and portfolioDomainAssociate, as well as from listDomains.

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 description implies it should be used when the agent needs the set of portfolios in the current account. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternative tools, so the agent must infer routing from sibling names.

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