14 tools with consistent naming (verb_noun pattern) and descriptions present. However, critical gaps: input schemas are inferred from code, not explicitly visible in registration; parameter descriptions are minimal or absent in most tools; output schemas are undocumented; error handling is generic. Tool names are clear (assess_*, generate_*, estimate_*) but parameter documentation is sparse. No evidence of enum constraints, validation guidance, or recovery hints. Descriptions average ~80 chars, below the 194-char baseline for A+ tools. This server reads as a functional prototype lacking production-grade LLM-facing documentation.

• Document output schemas for all 14 tools. Include field names, types, and descriptions. E.g., assess_workload should return {recommendation: string, 7rs_strategy: enum, risk_score: number, blockers: array}.
• Add enum constraints to strategy parameters (explain_7rs, estimate_migration_cost, generate_migration_runbook). Replace free-form strings with explicit values: ['Rehost', 'Replatform', 'Repurchase', 'Refactor', 'Retire', 'Retain', 'Relocate'].
• Expand parameter descriptions to 50-100 chars with format/constraint details. E.g., 'Target cloud provider (aws, azure, gcp)' → 'Target cloud provider. Must be one of: aws, azure, gcp. Determines cost estimation model and service availability.'
• Add error recovery hints to tool descriptions. E.g., 'If workload validation fails, ensure all required fields (name, technology, environment, database, criticality) are present and non-empty.'
• Document tool composition chains. E.g., 'Call assess_workload first to get 7Rs recommendation, then pass recommendation to plan_migration_waves to prioritize across portfolio.'

Inferred effective spec: 2026-07-28+.

• Relies on Stateful initialize / Mcp-Session-Id (removed; protocol is stateless) - make each request self-contained