Two tools with basic schemas and minimal descriptions. register_step and repair_plan both lack parameter descriptions, critical for LLM understanding. Descriptions are present but generic (under 100 chars). No output schema documented. No error handling guidance. No tool annotations. Schemas are present but parameters lack descriptions, violating the 100% baseline for A+ tools. This server falls into the 'poor' category typical of community implementations.

• Add descriptions to every parameter. Example: 'step_name (string): Unique identifier for this workflow step. Used to reference this step in prerequisites and fallback_actions.'
• Document output schema for both tools. Specify fields, types, and meaning. Example for repair_plan: 'Returns {repair_possible: boolean, failed_step: string, affected_steps: [string], repaired_plan_suffix: [string], steps_saved: number}'.
• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 chars. Include WHEN to call, prerequisites, and side effects. Example: 'Register a workflow step with its prerequisite dependencies and optional fallback actions. Call this before repair_plan to define the DAG. Mutates internal state.'
• Add error handling with recovery guidance. If no fallbacks exist, return: 'No fallback alternatives registered for step X. Register fallback_actions via register_step() first, or manually provide alternative steps.'
• Add tool annotations: mark register_step with destructiveHint=true (mutates state), repair_plan with readOnlyHint=true (no side effects).