Two tools with minimal descriptions (both ~60 chars, below baseline 194 chars). Input schemas present but sparse: single string parameter per tool with minimal context. No output schema documentation. No error handling guidance, parameter constraints, or recovery paths. Tools lack actionable descriptions explaining WHEN to use them or WHAT they return. No pagination, no structured output specification. Naming is acceptable (verb_noun pattern) but descriptions fail to meet LLM-optimization standards.

• Expand tool descriptions to 150-250 chars. Example: 'research_company: Gather company intelligence by domain. Returns registration dates (WHOIS), IP addresses (DNS), and detected tech stack (frameworks, servers, libraries). Use this for competitive analysis or due diligence. Requires valid domain with TLS certificate.'
• Document output schema explicitly. Define research_company returns {whois: {created, updated}, dns: [string], technologies: [string]}. Define detect_tech_stack returns {domain: string, technologies: [string], detection_method: string}.
• Add parameter validation: 'domain (string, required): Fully qualified domain name (e.g. example.com). Must include TLD. IPv4 addresses not supported. Max 255 chars. Invalid domains return error with suggestion to verify spelling.'
• Implement structured error responses. Instead of silent failures, return {error: 'timeout', message: 'WHOIS lookup exceeded 10s. Domain may be unreachable or blocking automated queries.', retry: true}. Guide LLM on next steps.
• Add rate-limit and timeout guidance to descriptions. E.g. 'Note: WHOIS and DNS queries may be rate-limited. Space calls 5+ seconds apart. HTTP requests timeout after 10s if domain is unresponsive.'