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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds the id-vs-query mode semantics but says nothing about pagination behavior, default result size, or what happens when neither id nor query is supplied, which would be the value-add beyond annotations.

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?

One sentence, zero waste, with the single-record path front-loaded ahead of the list path. Every clause earns its place.

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 a well-described schema and no output schema, the definition is adequate but thin. It omits default limit behavior and result shape context that would help an agent call it confidently on the first try.

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 schema already documents skip, sort, limit, and query. The description reinforces the id/query split but adds no format or default detail beyond it, and 'fields' is undocumented in both places. 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 ('LimFamily records') and distinguishes the two retrieval modes (single by id vs. filtered list). It does not differentiate itself from the ~35 query_lim* siblings, which all share the same pattern, so an agent still needs the resource name to route.

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 explains when to pass id versus query, which is genuine mode-selection guidance. However it offers no exclusions or alternatives (e.g., when not to query many, or how it relates to query_limfamilyusage), leaving usage only implied for the sibling-selection problem.

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