5 tools present with verb-noun naming (scan_*, validate_*, get_*). All have descriptions and basic input schemas. However, descriptions are generic and lack LLM-optimized detail. Parameters exist but many lack comprehensive constraints or context. No output schemas documented. Error handling not visible in provided code. This is typical of domain-specific security tools that prioritize functionality over agent ergonomics.

• Expand each tool description to 100 - 150 chars, answering: What security threats does it detect? (e.g., 'Scans for prompt injection, SQL injection, and memory poisoning patterns.') When should agents call it? What is the return format? Example: 'Scan a single memory entry for OWASP ASI06 memory poisoning threats (injection, jailbreak, data exfiltration). Returns array of {threat_type, severity, confidence, location}.'
• Add max_length constraint to 'text' parameters. Document expected format: 'plaintext UTF-8, max 10000 characters. HTML and code blocks are supported but may increase false positives.'
• Document output schema for each tool. Use inline JSON schema or example. E.g., scan_memory_entry returns: {threats: [{type: string, severity: 'low'|'medium'|'high'|'critical', confidence: 0-1, description: string}], is_safe: boolean}.
• Rename 'validate_before_store' and 'validate_before_recall' to a single 'validate_memory_entry' with an optional 'context' parameter ('store' or 'recall'). This removes assumed workflow coupling and makes the tool more composable.
• Add error guidance: 'If timeout occurs on large entries (>5MB), split the text and call scan_memory_batch instead.' 'If all threats are low-confidence, consider double-checking with get_threat_categories to ensure detection rules are active.'
• For get_threat_categories, add description of threat taxonomy depth and update frequency. E.g., 'Returns comprehensive list of detectable threat types with descriptions and confidence thresholds. Updated daily. Use this to explain which threats were detected in a scan.'