24 tools with complete schemas and descriptions, but descriptions are uniformly terse (10-30 chars), well below the 50-200 char LLM-optimized baseline. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (search, list, get, download) which is good. However, descriptions lack context on WHEN to use each tool, prerequisites, or what distinguishes similar tools (e.g., search vs. count vs. list). Parameters are typed and mostly described, but many descriptions are single-word or generic ('the paper ID', 'how many papers to return'). No error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, no indication of which tools are idempotent or safe to retry. The 'download' tool is marked WRITE but lacks confirmation/dry-run pattern. Overall: functional but minimal, descriptions do not meet LLM-optimization standards.

• Expand all tool descriptions to 50-200 chars. Include WHAT the tool does, WHEN to use it (vs. similar tools), and what it returns. Example: 'Search arXiv papers by keywords, author, title, or date range. Use this for broad discovery; use author() for papers by a specific person. Returns up to N papers with ID, title, abstract, and authors.'
• Document output schemas for all tools. Specify which fields are returned (paper_id, title, abstract, authors, date, etc.) so LLMs can chain tools. Example: 'Returns array of {paper_id, title, abstract, authors[], date, url}'.
• Add error handling guidance. For each tool, document common failures and recovery paths. Example: 'If no results found, try broader keywords or check category codes with categories(). If rate-limited, wait 30s and retry.'
• Add parameter constraints and ranges. For 'n' (number of papers), specify min/max (e.g., 1-100). For 'sort', document valid enums. For dates, specify format (YYYY-MM-DD). Example: 'n: integer, 1-100, default 10'.
• Add tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) to help LLMs reason about safety and retry logic. Mark 'download' as destructiveHint=true and add a confirmation pattern.