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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond what the schema already documents (id vs query semantics, pagination limits, sort). No rate limits, auth requirements, or return-shape context are 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?

A single tight sentence with the core behavior front-loaded. Every clause earns its place and there is no 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 read-only query tool with strong schema coverage and no output schema needed, the description tells the agent the two main invocation paths. It omits pagination/sort guidance, but the schema already carries that, so nothing critical 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 83%, so the schema already documents id, skip, sort, limit, and query with concrete detail (ranges, defaults, examples). The description adds nothing beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Find) and resource (LimApiKey records) and explains the two operational modes: single record by id or filtered list by query. It does not explicitly differentiate from the many sibling query_lim* tools, though the resource name in the tool name effectively does that.

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?

Gives clear routing guidance between the two modes of this tool: 'pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list.' It does not name an alternative tool or state when-not to use it, but within a uniform query_lim* family the mode guidance is the relevant selection context.

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