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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds essentially no behavioral context beyond that: no note on pagination defaults, clamping, result shape, or what happens with conflicting id/query. With the safety profile already covered structurally, the description contributes little.

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 mode selection first and no filler. It is efficient, though it omits any caveat that would make it more than merely tight.

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 6-parameter tool with a nested MongoDB-style query object and no output schema, the description covers only the two top-level modes. The pagination and projection parameters are left entirely to the schema, which is adequate but not rich.

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, and query semantics in detail. The description echoes the id-vs-query split but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 (LimPayCode records) and distinguishes the two retrieval modes. It does not differentiate from the many sibling query_lim* tools beyond the resource name, which is inherent to this family.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to pass id for a single record or query for a filtered list, which is the key routing decision for this tool. It stops short of stating when to prefer this over alternatives or what happens if both are supplied.

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