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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe, read-only nature of the operation. The description adds the behavioral distinction between fetching a single record and querying a filtered list, which is useful but also largely reflected in the schema parameter descriptions. It does not disclose pagination behavior, default limits, or authentication requirements beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It immediately states what the tool does and then explains the two usage modes efficiently.

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?

The schema is fairly rich and annotations cover the safety profile, so the brief description is mostly adequate for this query tool. However, the fields parameter has no description in either the schema or the description, and pagination or default behavior is left entirely to the schema. The description does not fully compensate for those gaps.

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 high at 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters including id, skip, sort, limit, and query. The description mentions id and query, but only as part of the mode selection, adding no new syntax or format details beyond the schema. 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 LimNote records'. It distinguishes two operating modes (single record via id, filtered list via query), which helps an agent understand the tool's scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from any of the many sibling query_lim* tools, 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?

The description gives clear in-tool guidance: pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list. This tells the agent exactly how to choose between the two modes. It does not state when not to use the tool or name an alternative sibling, so it is not a 5.

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