Four tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and output schema clarity. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (generate_, validate_, export_, get_). Descriptions exist but are brief (40-80 chars, below the 194-char baseline). Input schemas present with enums for format parameters, but output schemas are not documented. No error handling guidance. Parameters lack detailed constraints and format specifications. The server lacks pagination, result limits, and recovery guidance, critical for production use.

• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., generate_workflow_spec should return {workflow: string, format: string, metadata: {nodes: number, edges: number}}.
• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 chars. Include WHEN to use (e.g., 'Use this to convert a workflow from Mermaid to BPMN format') and any prerequisites.
• Add format and length constraints to parameters. E.g., 'description: string (1-5000 chars, plain text or markdown)' and 'format: enum (mermaid|bpmn|json|yaml)'.
• Add error handling guidance. E.g., 'If validation fails, returns {valid: false, errors: [{line: number, message: string}]}. Retry with corrected workflow.'
• Implement result limits and document them. E.g., 'Exported workflow limited to 100KB; larger workflows must be split into sub-workflows.'