Server has 4 tools with complete input schemas and basic descriptions. Naming follows verb_noun convention (start_tracking, stop_tracking, list_workspaces, show_current_time_entry). However, descriptions are minimal (10-50 chars), lacking context on WHEN to use each tool, prerequisites, or what the LLM should expect. Parameter descriptions exist but are sparse. No output schema documentation visible. Error handling returns text responses but lacks structured guidance for LLM recovery. start_tracking has reasonable parameter coverage (title, workspace_id, project_id, tags) with types, but descriptions don't explain constraints or defaults. Tools operating on the same resource (start/stop/show) have clear naming distinction. No evidence of pagination, batching, or result limits for list_workspaces.

• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 chars. For start_tracking: 'Start a new time entry for a task. Fails if a task is already running, call stop_tracking first. Returns entry ID, workspace, and start timestamp. Use this to begin tracking work on a project.'
• Document output schemas explicitly. Define what start_tracking returns: {entry_id: integer, description: string, workspace_id: integer, start_time: ISO8601, project_id?: integer}. Same for all tools.
• Add constraint details to parameter descriptions. E.g., 'workspace_id (integer, optional): Workspace ID. If omitted, uses your default workspace. Call list_workspaces to discover valid IDs.'
• Add pagination to list_workspaces: include limit (default 20, max 100) and offset parameters. Return total_count and next_offset so the LLM can fetch more if needed.
• Implement structured error responses. Instead of plain text, return {error: string, error_code: string, recovery_hint: string, retryable: boolean}. E.g., {error: 'Task already running', error_code: 'TASK_RUNNING', recovery_hint: 'Call stop_tracking first', retryable: false}.