zpa_list_pra_portals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description redundantly repeats 'read-only' without adding new behavioral context such as pagination behavior, search semantics, or what data is returned. No contradiction exists, but no additional transparency value is provided.

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 a single short sentence, 'List ZPA PRA portals (read-only).' It is immediately clear, front-loaded, and contains no filler or redundant words beyond what is necessary.

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 tool has five parameters and no output schema, but the description gives no context about pagination, filtering, search semantics, or even what a PRA portal is. It is adequate as a label but not as a complete guide for an agent.

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 only 20% (only the 'query' parameter has a description), and the tool description mentions none of the five parameters. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, adding no meaning about page, search, page_size, or 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 uses the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'ZPA PRA portals', clearly distinguishing it from a get (single) tool like zpa_get_pra_portal and other list tools. It also notes read-only status, which reinforces the action.

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 listing behavior but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over sibling tools such as zpa_get_pra_portal or zpa_list_pra_credentials. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving the usage context implicit.

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