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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It adds nothing about result ordering, pagination defaults, or clamping behavior (those live only in the schema), so it clears the lowered bar without distinguishing itself.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb first and zero filler; every clause carries information an agent needs to choose between the two modes.

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?

Six parameters, a nested query object, and no output schema; the description covers only the id-vs-query branch. The remaining parameters are handled by the schema, but with no output schema present the description also never hints at what a returned record contains.

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 skip, sort, limit, and query syntax including the MongoDB-style filter example. The description restates only the id/query dichotomy and adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('LimMcpLink records') plus the two retrieval modes, so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not differentiate itself from the ~46 structurally identical query_lim* siblings beyond the resource name, which the name already carries.

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 a clear selection rule: pass 'id' for a single record, use 'query' for a filtered list. It offers no exclusions or guidance on the other four parameters, but the primary branching decision is explicit.

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