Portfolios

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses the approximate corpus size, ranking by Ponisha's quality score, the fields returned in search mode, and the reduced title-and-link output in username mode. This is substantial behavioral context that helps an agent predict results and avoid surprises.

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 three tight sentences: purpose first, usage second, and mode behavior plus next step last. Every sentence adds useful information with no repetition or filler.

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 six-parameter search/list tool without an output schema, the description covers both modes, ranking behavior, returned fields, and a relevant follow-up tool. Pagination is left to the schema, and nothing essential for 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 coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful cross-parameter semantics: username overrides query and skills, and category applies only in search mode, which goes beyond the individual schema descriptions.

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 specific verb and resource: search portfolio items or list one user's portfolio. It also distinguishes the two operating modes and points to pn_profile for the author, so an agent can identify the tool without opening the 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?

It clearly states when to use the tool: to see examples of work or inspect what a freelancer has built. It also explains the username mode and that query/skills are ignored there, but it does not explicitly contrast the tool with closer siblings such as pn_services or pn_user_projects.

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