Four tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and output schema clarity. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (echo, read_note, read_jsonl_tail, list_notes), which is good. However, descriptions are minimal (10-60 chars), falling below the 50-200 char baseline for LLM-optimized descriptions. Parameters lack detailed constraints, ranges, and format specifications. No documented output schemas. Error handling and recovery guidance absent. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) despite all tools being READ_ONLY. Schema completeness is low, parameters have types but lack depth.

• Expand tool descriptions to 50-200 chars. Example: 'read_note: Read a vault-relative markdown note and return its full content as plaintext. Use this to fetch meeting notes, project docs, or any .md file. Returns the file content or 'not found' error.'
• Document output schemas for all tools. Specify return types: echo returns {text: string}, read_note returns {content: string, path: string, modified_at: string}, list_notes returns {notes: [{name: string, path: string, size: int}], total: int}.
• Add min/max constraints to numeric parameters in schema. read_jsonl_tail.limit should have minimum: 1, maximum: 50 in the JSON Schema, not just in description text.
• Add readOnlyHint: true to all four tool definitions to signal to agents that these tools are safe to call without side effects.
• Document error cases and recovery paths. E.g., 'If path not found, call list_notes() to discover available files' or 'If JSONL is malformed, try read_note() to inspect the raw file.'

Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.

• Relies on Logging (deprecated) - log to stderr or use OpenTelemetry