This Go-based MCP server implements 8 code analysis tools with reasonable naming and basic schema coverage, but falls short in parameter descriptions and output schema documentation. Tool names follow verb_noun conventions (semantic_search, lsp_analyze, ast_grep_search, read_file) which is good. However, parameter descriptions are minimal or missing context, and there is no visible documentation of output schemas or return field structures. The server implements a custom HTTP transport and uses the mark3labs/mcp-go framework (v0.43.2), suggesting modern MCP support, but critical details about response shapes and error handling are not evident in the provided code samples.

• Document output schemas for all 8 tools. For each, specify: field names, types (string, number, object, array), whether each field is always present, and what the fields mean. E.g., semantic_search should return 'results: [{file: string, line: number, score: number, context: string}], total_results: number'.
• Add 50 - 150 character descriptions to each LSP tool explaining when to use it and how it differs from siblings. E.g., 'lsp_implementation: Find all implementations of the selected interface or base class. Use this to navigate type hierarchies. Returns array of file locations with implementation ranges.'
• Expand parameter descriptions with format and range constraints. E.g., 'line: 0-based line number within file (must be >= 0 and < file_line_count)', 'character: 0-based character offset on the line'.
• Add error recovery guidance in tool descriptions or a separate errors section. E.g., 'If file not found, verify the path is absolute or relative to project root. If symbol not found, check spelling and try semantic_search.'
• For read_file, clarify: 'If start_line is omitted, defaults to 0. If end_line is 0 or omitted, returns entire file. If end_line < start_line, returns empty result (not an error).'
• For ast_grep_search, clarify: 'If project is omitted, searches the current working directory. To search a specific project, pass its absolute path.'
• Add examples of valid inputs to parameter descriptions (but not in the description text itself, use enum constraints or JSON Schema examples when possible). E.g., 'hover: boolean (default true), whether to include hover information from LSP'.