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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this a safe read, so the description's burden is lighter. It adds useful mode-selection context (single vs many) but says nothing about default result size, pagination behavior, or what a filtered list returns. Marginal added value over 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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the two modes. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With six optional parameters and no output schema, the description omits the default limit of 50, the clamping behavior, and the shape of returned records. The schema covers these parameter details, but an agent relying solely on the description would not know default pagination or return structure.

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 id, skip, sort, limit, query, and fields. The description only reinforces the id/query split, largely duplicating the schema's own 'Fetch one record by id; omit to query many'. 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Find LimGiftCard records') and immediately splits into two modes: single-record by id, filtered list by query. The resource name itself distinguishes it from siblings like query_limaccount or query_limstoreapp. It stops short of explicitly differentiating sibling behavior beyond the resource noun.

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?

'Pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list' gives the agent a clear selection rule between the two modes, matching the schema's 'omit to query many'. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance are given, which keeps it below a 5.

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