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 operation, so the description does not need to establish safety. The description adds the id-vs-query mode distinction, but that is largely repeated from the schema's id description, and it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or result behavior.

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?

It is a single sentence with zero wasted words, and the two operating modes are front-loaded immediately after the resource name. Nothing is buried or unnecessarily verbose.

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 read-only query tool with high schema coverage and no output schema, the description gives the core call-shape decision: single-record fetch versus filtered query. It could mention pagination or field selection, but the schema handles those adequately, so nothing critical is missing.

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 the important parameters, including id, skip, sort, limit, query, and fields. The description mentions id and query but adds no syntax, default, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides; 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 names a specific verb (Find) and resource (LimStockMedia records), and it distinguishes the two retrieval modes: single by id or filtered by query. This is clear enough for an agent to know what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling query_lim* tools beyond the resource name.

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 explicitly tells the caller to pass id for one record and use query for a filtered list, which covers the main usage choice. It does not state when not to use the tool or name any alternative, but the sibling tools are all different resources, so this is a reasonable amount of guidance.

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