Portfolio item details

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful value by naming exactly what comes back, but says nothing about rate limits, missing/invalid token behavior, or error cases for an open-world lookup.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste, and the return contents are front-loaded before the workflow hints. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the returned fields, and it closes the loop by naming the follow-up tool. Nothing essential to correct invocation is 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 description coverage is 100% and the schema already spells out that the parameter accepts a token from kl_worksamples, a slug, or a karlancer.com/worksample/... URL. The description adds no acceptance details of its own, so the schema is doing all the work.

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 ('Get one Karlancer portfolio item in full') and enumerates the payload contents (description, skills, price range, duration, owner, similar items). It also implicitly contrasts with the plural sibling kl_worksamples, which returns the list this tool retrieves a single item from.

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 sequences the tool: 'Use after kl_worksamples' and then routes the agent onward with 'Pass the owner id to kl_freelancer for the profile.' That is strong workflow guidance with named alternatives, though it gives no conditions under which this tool should be skipped.

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