get_portals

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It states the tool returns a list but does not disclose whether it is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or if results are paginated (though page/limit parameters suggest pagination). No side effects or limitations are described.

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 two sentences, both front-loaded. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second adds relevant context about portals. No redundant or extraneous words.

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?

Given 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives reasonable context but lacks explicit mention of pagination behavior or typical response structure. It covers the tool's function and portal concept adequately but could be slightly more informative.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context about what portals are (e.g., 'used to collect files from external users') but does not provide additional meaning to individual parameters beyond what the schema already supplies. Parameter descriptions in schema are clear.

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 clearly states the verb ('get list') and resource ('portals'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'get_portal' (singular) by indicating this returns a list. Additional context about portals (collect files, subdomain, settings) reinforces the tool's purpose without confusion.

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 usage (when you need a list of portals) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_portal' (singular) or 'create_portal'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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