Swagger: Update Portal

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

Annotations already signal destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the mutation profile is partially covered. The description's parameter notes add useful side-effect context, such as subdomain 'changes the portal URL' and offline 'hides portal from customers', though it does not discuss permissions, reversibility, or broader destructive impact. 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?

The purpose statement is front-loaded and clear, but the description then duplicates the entire 10-parameter input schema nearly verbatim. Most of the parameter entries do not earn their place because the agent already has that information in the structured schema.

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?

All parameters are documented, the required portalId is obvious, and an output schema exists, so an agent can construct a valid call. However, the description lacks guidance on prerequisites, when updating is appropriate, and what post-update side effects to verify, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description's parameter list essentially mirrors the schema without adding new semantic meaning, so it stays at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Update a specific portal's configuration.' This distinguishes it from create/get/delete portal tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools to differentiate from update_portal_product.

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 verb 'Update' and resource 'portal' imply this is for modifying an existing portal, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives like swagger_create_portal or swagger_get_portal. The 'Toolset: Portals' line provides only weak context.

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