Most tool descriptions are generic 1-2 sentence statements without WHEN/WHY context. Tool names lack clarity: 'live_mixer_set' vs 'live_mixer_extended_set' are confusingly similar. No parameter descriptions visible for any tool. No output schemas documented. Error handling and recovery guidance absent. Only 2 tools (audio_analyze, plan_user_journey) have non-empty schemas, but even those lack parameter descriptions. This server would fail code review by any production standard.

• Add non-empty input schemas to all 58 tools with empty {} schemas. For tools that accept no parameters, use an explicit empty object type with a description explaining why (e.g., 'This tool requires no input parameters; call it directly.').
• Add parameter descriptions to plan_user_journey and audio_analyze. For each parameter, state the expected format, range, and allowed values. E.g., 'experienceLevel: One of beginner, intermediate, advanced. Determines the complexity of suggested production steps.'
• Document output schemas for all tools. Specify field names, types, and what each field represents. E.g., 'Returns {status: string, tempo: number, bars: number, tracks: array of {id, name, volume}}'. This enables LLMs to chain tools correctly.
• Rename confusingly similar mixer tools: live_mixer_set → live_mixer_track_set (for track-level mixer), live_mixer_extended_set → live_mixer_device_set (for device parameters), live_chain_mixer_set → live_mixer_chain_set (for chain-level mixer). Add descriptions clarifying scope.
• Add error handling and recovery guidance to all tools. For each tool, document: (1) what errors can occur, (2) whether they are retryable, (3) what the LLM should do next. E.g., 'If track not found, call live_discover() to list available tracks.'