Server has 5 tools with complete input schemas and descriptions, but quality is uneven. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (optimize_, upload_, get_, backtest_, compare_). Descriptions are present (194 - 250 chars avg) and explain WHAT and WHEN, meeting baseline. However, parameter descriptions lack actionable constraints (ranges, formats, enums for non-enum fields). Output schemas are not documented, LLMs cannot plan downstream calls. Error handling is absent from descriptions. Security concerns: upload_price_data accepts file_path without validation, risking path traversal. No mention of rate limits or retry guidance. Composition is reasonable (5 distinct concerns), but tools lack chaining metadata (e.g., optimize_portfolio_bl should return ticker list for backtest_portfolio).

• Document output schemas for all tools. Example: optimize_portfolio_bl returns {weights: {ticker: number}, expected_return: number, volatility: number, sharpe_ratio: number}. This enables LLMs to plan chaining.
• Add enum constraints to period parameter: enum: ['1Y', '3M', '6M', '1M', '5Y']. Replace free-form string with machine-parseable options.
• Add range constraints to numeric parameters: confidence description should state '(0.0 - 1.0, default 0.5)'. sensitivity_range should state 'array of 1 - 5 floats, each 0.0 - 1.0'.
• Implement file_path validation in upload_price_data: reject paths containing '..', enforce whitelist of allowed directories (e.g., /app/data/user_uploads/), and document max file size (e.g., 100 MB).
• Add error recovery guidance: 'If optimization fails due to singular covariance matrix, try increasing date range or reducing ticker count. If backtest fails, verify weights sum to 1.0.'