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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this is a safe read. The description adds the id-vs-query mode distinction, which is useful behavior, but says nothing about return shape, pagination behavior, or result ordering beyond what the schema states. Adequate but modest given annotations carry the safety profile.

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 no filler; the primary mode distinction comes first and every clause earns its place.

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?

With high schema coverage and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description covers the essential mode selection. However, it omits return-format context and pagination semantics that would help an agent call it correctly, and there is no output schema to carry that burden.

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 id, query, skip, sort, and limit. The description's mention that id fetches one record and query produces a filtered list echoes the schema's own parameter descriptions rather than adding new meaning. 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?

States a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('LimSlideDoc records'), and distinguishes the two operating modes: single-record retrieval via id versus filtered list via query. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, but the resource name itself separates it from the other query_lim* tools.

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?

Clearly explains when to use each mode: pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list. It provides actionable selection context but names no alternatives or exclusions, keeping it below a 5.

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