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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description adds only the id/query mode split, which is essentially purpose rather than behavior. Nothing is said about default limits, clamping, sorting semantics, or what the response shape looks like, so the description contributes little beyond the annotation.

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 compact sentence with the two call modes front-loaded and zero padding. It is appropriately sized for what it conveys, though it could still afford one clause on scoping or result defaults.

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 83% schema coverage and no output schema, the essential calling information is mostly present via structured fields. However, the description omits any sibling routing guidance in a family of ~45 near-identical query tools, leaving an agent with little basis for choosing this one.

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 itself documents id, skip, sort, limit, and query thoroughly. The description's id-vs-query framing duplicates what the id parameter's schema description already says ('Fetch one record by id; omit to query many'), adding no new parameter meaning.

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 clear verb ('Find') and specific resource ('LimVidFollow records'), and distinguishes the two operational modes (single by id vs. filtered list by query). It does not, however, differentiate itself from the large family of sibling query_limX tools beyond the resource noun.

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?

The description implies usage: pass id for one record, or query for a filtered list. That covers mode selection but gives no guidance on when to reach for this tool versus sibling query tools, no preconditions, and no note on pagination or result-set sizing behavior.

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