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

The only annotation is readOnlyHint=true, which the description implicitly aligns with ('Find'). Beyond that, it adds no behavioral context: no mention of pagination behavior, default field projection, sorting implications, or what the response contains. The description is largely redundant with the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and then the two usage modes. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

Given six parameters, a nested query object, and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the primary id-vs-query distinction, but leaves the agent to infer return shape, pagination behavior, and the role of fields/sort/skip/limit entirely from the schema. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 83%, so the baseline is 3. The description references 'id' and 'query' but only restates their roles, which are already documented in the schema. It adds no syntax, format, or interaction details beyond what the schema provides.

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 specific verb ('Find') and resource ('LimBroadcast records'), and explicitly covers the two operational modes (single record via id, filtered list via query). The resource name distinguishes it from the many sibling query_lim* tools, even without naming alternatives.

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 clearly says to pass 'id' for one record and 'query' for a filtered list, giving concrete guidance for the two modes. It does not mention when to avoid this tool or name alternative siblings, but the mode-based guidance is explicit and sufficient for selection.

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