dealdesk.portfolio_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about required scope/permissions, whether the operation is read-only, or what the draft vs published summary contains. The only behavioral hint (project must match the API key/OAuth project) lives in the schema, not the description.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than genuinely concise.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented locale parameter, the description should explain what the summary returns and what locale controls. As written, an agent lacks enough information to invoke it confidently beyond the required projectId.

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 only 50%: projectId is documented in the schema, but the locale parameter has no description anywhere. The tool description adds no meaning about locale (e.g., which languages are supported or default behavior), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 gives a verb (Get) and a resource (Portfolio draft/published summary for a project), which is more than a tautology. However, 'Portfolio' is left undefined and the description does not distinguish this from sibling dealdesk.portfolio_evaluate, so an agent cannot tell the two apart without opening schemas.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus dealdesk.portfolio_evaluate or any other summary tool, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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