Update RIS portfolio

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

Adds context beyond the annotations: changes take effect on the server immediately with no undo step, open portfolios see the change only on the next rillsoft_portfolio_ris_open, and the call runs with the desktop-session login. These are the operational facts an agent needs before a mutation, and they do not contradict destructiveHint=false or idempotentHint=true.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the rename/replace purpose comes first, then constraints, then side effects. The mention of the desktop UI dialogs is slightly padded for an agent audience but negligible.

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 4-parameter update tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers everything material: required inputs, immutability of kind, immediacy/no-undo, visibility timing for open portfolios, and session context.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the cross-parameter constraint (at least one of name/folderIds/projectIds) which the schema does not express, but otherwise restates what the schema already documents about replacement semantics.

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 (renames / replaces selection) and resource (portfolio of the logged-in client on the Rillsoft Integration Server), and explicitly carves out what cannot be changed (the kind). It is distinguishable from siblings such as rillsoft_portfolio_ris_create/list/delete 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?

Explicitly says 'at least one of name, folderIds and projectIds is required' and that the kind cannot be changed, which rules out misuse. It stops short of naming which sibling to use when the kind must change or when the operation should be an open/save instead.

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