Two tools with minimal descriptions (both under 100 chars) and no visible input parameter descriptions. Schemas are present but lack parameter-level documentation. Tool names are verb-based but descriptions are vague about when/why to use them. No error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, and no parameter constraints (enums, ranges). The server implements root confinement (security positive) but fails to document this in tool descriptions, leaving LLMs unaware of the constraint.

• Add parameter descriptions: 'file_path (string): Relative or absolute path to the document. Must be within DIF_MCP_INPUT_ROOT (default: current directory). Symlinks are rejected. Paths outside the root raise PermissionError.'
• Document output schemas. For inspect_file, describe the 'closed result schema' structure (e.g., 'Returns {risk_level: string, findings: array, ...}'). For read_low_derivative, specify the plaintext format and encoding.
• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 chars explaining when to use each: 'inspect_file: Scan a document and return a risk assessment (low/review/quarantine). Use this first to determine if the document is safe. read_low_derivative: Extract plaintext only if the document is low-risk. Use after inspect_file confirms low risk.'
• Add error recovery guidance. Change PermissionError messages to: 'Document is not releasable (risk level: {level}). Call inspect_file to review findings before attempting extraction.' and 'Path outside root or invalid. Ensure the file is within DIF_MCP_INPUT_ROOT and is not a symlink.'
• Document the RiskLevel enum in descriptions. Specify valid risk levels (low, review, quarantine) and what each means, so LLMs understand the risk assessment output.