Server has 7 tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps limit production readiness. All tools have descriptions (10-50 chars, mostly short), and input schemas are present with typed parameters. However, descriptions lack depth, most are single sentences without context on WHEN to use the tool or what happens on failure. Output schemas are undocumented. Error handling is absent: no guidance on retryability, no recovery hints, no validation of inputs like symbol format or quantity bounds. The 'push' tool has an unusual nested 'args' parameter structure that complicates invocation. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) despite clear risk levels (READ_ONLY vs WRITE). Parameter descriptions are minimal, 'symbol' lacks format guidance (BTC vs btc?), 'quantity' has no bounds, 'rationale' is vague. Composition is reasonable (separate read/write tools), but missing idempotency guarantees and confirmation patterns for destructive operations (buy_shares, sell_shares, change_strategy).

• Add output schema documentation to every tool. Example: 'Returns: {"balance": float, "currency": string, "last_updated": ISO8601 timestamp}'. This enables LLM planning.
• Expand parameter descriptions with constraints. Example: 'symbol: Crypto symbol in uppercase (BTC, ETH, SOL, BTCUSD). Case-sensitive.' 'quantity: Positive number, max 1000000 units.'
• Add confirmation/dry-run pattern to buy_shares and sell_shares. Example: Add optional 'dry_run: bool' parameter. Return estimated cost/proceeds before executing.
• Implement error classification in tool responses. Return structured errors: {"error": "insufficient_balance", "available": 1000.50, "required": 5000, "retryable": false}. Guide LLM on next steps.
• Flatten 'push' tool parameters. Change 'args: PushModelArgs' to direct 'message: str' parameter. Align with standard MCP tool signature.