Server has 5 tools with complete input schemas and descriptions, but quality is uneven. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (transcribe_v2, list_transcripts, get_transcript, get_stats, delete_transcript). Descriptions are present but brief (avg ~80 chars, below 194-char baseline). Parameters are typed with enums where appropriate (source, status fields), but descriptions lack actionable detail on constraints, formats, and dependencies. Output schemas are not documented, LLMs cannot predict response structure. Error handling is minimal; no recovery guidance. Destructive tool (delete_transcript) lacks confirmation pattern. Overall: functional but below production baseline.

• Document output schemas for all tools. Example for get_stats: 'Returns {credits: number, plan: string, transcripts_total: number, rate_limit: {requests_per_minute: number, remaining: number}}'.
• Add min/max bounds to numeric parameters. E.g. 'limit: number (1 - 100, default 10)' and 'page: number (≥1, default 1)'.
• Expand parameter descriptions with format and validation rules. E.g. 'language: ISO 639-1 code (e.g. en, fr, de) or BCP 47 tag (e.g. en-US, pt-BR). Invalid codes return error 400.'
• Implement confirmation pattern for delete_transcript: add optional 'confirm: boolean' parameter or return a confirmation token requiring a second call.
• Add error recovery hints to tool descriptions. E.g. 'If video has no captions, try source="auto" or check if the video is public and has transcripts available.'