LeClap MCP has 6 tools with significant definition gaps. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (get_, validate_, compose_, probe_, render_), which is good. However, descriptions are extremely brief (10-20 chars), falling well below the 50-200 char baseline for LLM-optimized tools. No input schemas are visible in the provided source code, only tool names and descriptions are evident. Parameter documentation is absent. Output schemas are not documented. Error handling and recovery guidance are missing. The server is STDIO-only, which is a hard transport limitation. Overall, this reads as an early-stage implementation lacking production-grade definition quality.

• Expand all tool descriptions to 50-200 characters. Example: 'get_template_schema' → 'Retrieve the JSON schema definition for video composition templates. Use this to understand required fields before calling validate_template or compose_video.'
• Document input schemas for all tools with explicit parameter types, descriptions, and constraints. Example for compose_video: {"template": {"type": "object", "description": "Video composition template (validate with validate_template first)"}, "output_path": {"type": "string", "description": "File path where rendered video will be saved"}}
• Document output schemas. Example for get_template_schema: {"schema": {"type": "object", "description": "JSON Schema object defining template structure"}, "version": {"type": "string"}}
• Add error handling and recovery guidance to compose_video and render_remotion_clip. Return structured errors like {"error": "Invalid template", "details": "Missing required field: clips", "recovery": "Call validate_template() to identify issues"}
• Implement a dry-run or confirmation pattern for irreversible operations. Add optional 'dry_run' parameter to compose_video and render_remotion_clip, returning what would happen without executing.