Two very simple arithmetic tools with minimal but present definitions. Naming follows verb_noun pattern (add, subtract). Descriptions are short but adequate (10-40 chars). Input schemas are properly defined with typed parameters (integers) and individual parameter descriptions. However, the tools are trivial (add/subtract integers) and lack any production-grade considerations: no error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, no pagination, no composition with other tools, and no real-world context. This is a proof-of-concept server, not production-ready. Output schemas are not documented in the visible source. The definitions meet minimal requirements but fall well short of the A+/A baselines that require 50-200 char descriptions, complete output documentation, and error recovery guidance.

• Expand tool descriptions to 50-150 characters explaining when each tool is useful, what it returns, and any constraints. E.g., 'Adds two integers and returns their sum. Handles overflow automatically. Useful for basic arithmetic in multi-step calculations.'
• Document the output schema for each tool. Explicitly state: add() returns {result: integer, a: integer, b: integer} (or whatever structure is actual). Make return types visible to the LLM.
• Add min/max constraints to parameters if they exist. E.g., if integers must be -2^31 to 2^31-1, state that in the description: 'First integer (range: -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647)'.
• Implement error handling that returns structured error responses with actionable recovery hints. E.g., if overflow detected: 'Addition overflow. Result exceeds 64-bit integer range. Try smaller inputs.' instead of a generic 500.
• Consider enriching these minimal tools with production context: add a 'precision' or 'unit' parameter (if relevant), or document why they are read-only and safe to retry (idempotent).