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

The description is consistent with readOnlyHint: true, using 'Find' rather than implying mutation. It adds the id-versus-query mode distinction, but does not disclose other behavior such as default result size, pagination behavior, or whether an unfiltered query returns all records. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

It is a single compact sentence with no waste. The primary mode distinction is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 six parameters and 83% schema coverage, the description supplies the key mental model: one record by id or many records by query. The schema handles most parameter details, though the description could have mentioned pagination/default limit to be fully self-contained.

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 useful detail. The description reinforces the id/query split but adds little beyond what those schema descriptions already say. This matches the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Find LimBook records.' It also distinguishes the two core modes, fetching one record by id versus querying a filtered list. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling query tools beyond the LimBook resource name, so it stops short of a 5.

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 gives clear usage guidance for the main mode split: pass id for a single record, or query for a filtered list. It does not mention when to choose this tool over the many sibling query_lim* tools, but for this tool's own parameters the usage condition is explicit.

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