Two tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and error guidance. send_email has a complete input schema with 6 properties (to, subject, body, cc, bcc, attachments) and descriptions for each. draft_email has 5 properties with descriptions. However, parameter descriptions are minimal (10-30 chars), lacking format constraints, validation rules, or dependency hints. No output schemas documented. Error handling returns generic text responses without recovery guidance. Tool descriptions mention 'Requires approval' for send_email but provide no mechanism or detail. Missing idempotency guidance for a tool that performs irreversible actions (send_email marked IRREVERSIBLE). No tool annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint) present.

• Add format constraints to parameter descriptions: 'to: Valid email address (RFC 5322). For multiple recipients, use draft_email with comma-separated list in cc/bcc fields.'
• Document output schema explicitly: 'Returns {type: text, text: string} with message_id and thread_id fields for send_email; draft_id for draft_email.'
• Implement dry-run or confirmation step for send_email. Add optional 'dry_run: boolean' parameter or return a confirmation token requiring a second call.
• Add tool annotations to tool definitions: send_email with destructiveHint=true, draft_email with idempotentHint=true.
• Enhance error responses with structured error codes and recovery hints: '{"error": "invalid_recipient", "message": "Invalid email: john@. Did you mean [email protected]?", "retryable": true}'

Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.

• Relies on Logging (deprecated) - log to stderr or use OpenTelemetry