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 bar is lower. The description adds the single-vs-many mode split, but says nothing about result limits, default page size, or that out-of-range limits are clamped — that detail lives only in the schema.

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 well-formed sentence with zero padding, and the most important distinction (id vs query) is front-loaded.

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 including a nested object filter with no output schema; the description covers the mode choice but is silent on the undocumented 'fields' parameter and on return shape or pagination behavior, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 does most of the work, including an example MongoDB-style filter for query. The description only reinforces the id/query distinction and adds no syntax hints for sort, fields, or filter structure beyond what the schema already documents.

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) plus resource (LimRbkIp records) and distinguishes the two access modes (single by id vs filtered list). Differentiating from siblings is handled by the resource name itself, which is unique among the many query_lim* tools, though the description never says what a LimRbkIp is.

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 which parameter selects which behavior: 'pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list.' That is real routing guidance between two modes, but it gives no prerequisites, exclusions, or advice on combining id with query/sort/limit.

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