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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring the safety profile, the description adds only the single-vs-list distinction. It says nothing about result ordering defaults, what happens when both id and query are supplied, or how the nested MongoDB-style filter is interpreted server-side.

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 the two modes stated in order of precedence and zero filler. It is efficient but so terse that it borders on under-specification for a six-parameter tool.

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, a nested query object, no required fields and no output schema; the schema carries most of the burden, but the description leaves open the key ambiguity of id-plus-query behavior and gives no hint about return shape or result volume. Adequate, 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 already documents id, skip, sort, limit (with clamping) and the query filter example. The description merely restates the id-vs-query dichotomy and adds no syntax, format, or interaction detail beyond what the schema supplies; baseline 3 applies.

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 ('LimVidMute records') and distinguishes the two access modes (single-by-id vs. filtered list). It does not explain what a LimVidMute entity actually is, but the entity name alone separates it from the many query_lim* siblings.

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 mode to use: pass id for one record, otherwise use query for a filtered list. It gives clear in-tool selection context but no exclusions, prerequisites, or guidance on when to prefer this over another query tool or a write path.

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