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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the id-vs-query branching behavior but says nothing about default limits, clamping, pagination, or the shape of returned data beyond what the schema already states. With annotations present the bar is lower, so this is adequate but not rich.

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 that covers both usage modes with no filler. Nothing is wasted and the two branches are ordered as an agent would need them.

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, well-annotated query tool with an 83%-documented schema and no output schema, the definition covers what an agent needs to choose a mode. It stops short of describing return shape or result ordering, which would help but are not strictly required here.

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, skip, sort, limit, and query in detail. The description's only semantic contribution is reinforcing the id/query mutual exclusivity; the undocumented fields parameter is left unexplained in both places. 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/query) and a specific resource (LimWalletIdentity records), and clarifies the two modes of operation (single by id, list by query). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the many sibling query_lim* tools, but the entity name makes the intended target unambiguous.

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?

Gives clear conditional guidance: pass id for one record, use query for a filtered list. It lacks any exclusion or when-not guidance (e.g., what to do when neither id nor query is supplied, or limits on query complexity).

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