List RIS portfolios

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false), and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: it runs under the desktop session login, never prompts for credentials, and returns server/userName/clientId. It also re-states read-only/no-undo, which is redundant with annotations but harmless.

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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded, followed by the sibling routing and then the auth/return behavior. Slightly dense with clauses, but every sentence carries information relevant to calling or interpreting the tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, yet the description helpfully names key response fields. Combined with sibling routing and auth behavior, an agent has what it needs; only explicit exclusion conditions are missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'combine' enum parameter is fully documented in the schema itself, including the meaning of all, portfolio, and combine. The description adds no syntax or semantics for the parameter, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource (lists the logged-in client's RIS portfolios, both project portfolios and summary projects) and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling rillsoft_portfolio_ris_open (which consumes the returned portfolioId) and rillsoft_portfolio_file_open (which opens .rpp files). An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use it: to obtain portfolios plus the portfolioId that rillsoft_portfolio_ris_open requires, and explicitly names the alternative path for opening .rpp portfolio files. It does not state explicit exclusions (e.g. when not to call it or prerequisite session state), but the routing guidance is concrete.

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