Four tools with complete input schemas and descriptions, but descriptions are in German and lack LLM-optimized structure. All tools are READ_ONLY (good for safety), but descriptions are verbose (200+ chars) and lack actionable guidance on when to use each tool vs. alternatives. Parameter descriptions are present but generic. No output schemas documented. No error handling guidance visible. Tool naming follows verb_noun pattern (search_, get_) which is correct, but composition could be tighter, search_papers and get_paper_details overlap in intent.

• Translate all descriptions and parameter docs to English. German descriptions block LLM understanding and reduce adoption. Use clear, concise English (50-200 chars per description).
• Document output schemas for each tool. E.g., search_papers returns {papers: [{title, authors, year, doi, url}], total_count, next_cursor}. This enables LLMs to chain calls and extract fields.
• Add error handling guidance: 'If DOI not found, try search_papers() with author name or title. If rate-limited, retry after 60 seconds.' Categorize errors as retryable vs. user-fixable.
• Clarify tool composition: 'Use search_papers for discovery; use get_paper_details for full metadata (abstract, metrics) after finding a DOI.' Add dependency hints in descriptions.
• Add format constraints to parameters: DOI must match pattern '^10\.\d{4,}/[^\s]+$'; limit must be 1-100. Use enums or regex patterns in schema, not just description text.