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

The readOnlyHint annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description isn't obliged to restate that. It adds the single-vs-list mode distinction but says nothing about pagination defaults, result shape, or how the query filter is bounded, leaving behavioral gaps for a tool with nested filter objects.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the resource and immediately explains the two invocation paths. 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?

For a 6-parameter query tool with a nested filter object and no output schema, the description is minimal: it omits pagination behavior, return shape, and the fields projection. It is adequate to select the tool but not to call it fully informed.

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 most parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description only echoes id and query semantics. The undocumented 'fields' parameter is left entirely unspecified in both places, and no detail on filter syntax or sort format is added beyond the schema.

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?

"Find LimReferral records" gives a clear verb and a specific resource, and the id/query split tells the agent this is a dual-mode fetch tool. It does not explicitly contrast with the dozens of sibling query_lim* tools, but the resource name itself disambiguates them.

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?

It states the two modes ('pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list'), which is a genuine when-to-use signal for its own parameters. It offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or pointers to sibling/alternative tools, so guidance is implied rather than complete.

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