zpa_get_pra_portal

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

The description explicitly notes 'read-only', and the annotation readOnlyHint: true reinforces this. It does not mention other behaviors (e.g., side effects, rate limits), but for a read operation this is sufficient and transparent.

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 highly concise, consisting of a single sentence with no redundant or unnecessary content. It directly communicates the core function.

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?

The description does not explain the return value or output schema (which is absent). While a 'get' operation implies returning the resource, it does not specify the structure or any error conditions. It also lacks contextual guidance on when to use this over other portal-related tools. For a simple get, this is acceptable but incomplete.

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?

The description only mentions 'by ID' for portal_id, and microtenant_id is not explained. The schema provides no descriptions for either parameter, so the description adds little meaning beyond the parameter names. It does not clarify the purpose or format of the ID or the optional microtenant_id.

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 action ('Get one ZPA PRA portal') and the resource ('ZPA PRA portal'), with the identifier ('by ID') making it specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools by targeting PRA portal specifically.

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 a single PRA portal is needed by ID, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., listing portals) or provide context on when to prefer this over other get operations. No explicit guidance is given.

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