admin_get_limits

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the sole source of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'gets' something, implying a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm that no changes are made, nor does it mention any permission requirements or return value characteristics. This is insufficient for full transparency.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'Get.' It contains no filler or redundant wording, making it optimally concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides the core information needed to invoke it. However, the lack of any explanation about the return value or how this differs from closely related sibling tools (e.g., admin_get_limits_usage) leaves some context incomplete for an agent.

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?

The input schema already fully describes accountId as 'Account UUID,' achieving 100% schema coverage. The description's 'for an account' merely repeats the schema's meaning without adding new semantics. Since the schema carries the burden, the baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get configured rate limits for an account.' The verb 'Get' and the resource 'configured rate limits' are specific, and the scope 'for an account' is clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like admin_get_limits_usage or admin_get_limits_defaults, which could cause confusion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many similar admin_* sibling tools. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context solely from the tool name and generic description.

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