A portfolio built from several Windsurf projects has a problem a single project page does not: a reviewer comparing entries side by side will notice inconsistency immediately. If one entry has a working video and the next has only a screenshot, the screenshot entry reads as weaker even if the underlying project is just as solid, simply because the reviewer cannot tell. Treating the whole portfolio as one deliverable, rather than several separate ones, changes how each individual video should be planned.
Windsurf is a code editor, not a host, so each project in the portfolio is reachable wherever it was actually deployed, and that can vary from one project to the next. Before planning the portfolio's video set, confirm which projects are currently reachable at all, since an old project that has since been taken down cannot be represented honestly by a fresh recording. A portfolio is a living document, and some entries will need to be retired or represented differently once their live version disappears.
Older entries are worth auditing before a job search or a new round of client outreach, rather than assuming a video recorded months ago still matches the live project. A dependency can break, a free hosting tier can expire, or a project can simply be taken offline once its original purpose ends. A portfolio that links to several dead routes reads worse than a smaller portfolio where every entry still works.
