Forward MCP has 9 tools with complete input schemas and descriptions. Naming follows verb_noun convention (forward_*). Descriptions are present (avg ~120 chars) but lack actionable context for LLM selection. Parameter descriptions are minimal or absent, most params have no guidance on format, constraints, or dependencies. Output schemas are not documented. Error handling is basic. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint). Composition is sound (each tool has one responsibility), but parameter design forces LLMs to guess at complex nested objects like 'icp' and 'payment'.

• Add parameter descriptions to all complex objects. For 'icp' in forward_submit_brief, document expected structure: '{"roles": ["CTO", "VP Engineering"], "industry": "B2B SaaS", ...}'. For 'payment' in forward_checkout, list valid rails: 'credits | x402 | stripe_acp'.
• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., forward_signup returns {account_id, api_key, credits_balance}; forward_submit_brief returns {brief_id, missing_fields: []}. Include field types and descriptions.
• Add tool annotations: mark forward_checkout with destructiveHint=true (irreversible charge); mark forward_signup with idempotentHint=false (generates new key each call); mark read-only tools with readOnlyHint=true.
• Add range/format guidance to numeric and enum parameters. E.g., 'volume: integer, 1 - 10000'; 'difficulty: one of standard (fastest, lowest cost), hard (stricter criteria), elite (highest quality)'.
• Document error scenarios and recovery paths. E.g., 'If forward_submit_brief returns {error: "missing_fields", needs: ["industry"]}, call again with industry specified. If payment fails with 'insufficient_credits', call forward_credits to check balance.'