Single tool 'tool-call-validate' has a clear, descriptive name and adequate description (95 chars). Input schema is present with three parameters (tool_name, tool_input, expected_schema), all with type and description. However, the tool's purpose is meta-validation rather than domain-specific functionality, it validates tool calls themselves rather than performing user-facing work. No output schema is documented in the source. The tool lacks error handling guidance, recovery instructions, and does not follow the pattern of actionable, user-centric tools. This is a utility tool for internal MCP plumbing, not a production agent capability.

• Document the output schema explicitly. Specify fields returned on success (e.g. is_valid: boolean, errors: array, corrected_input: object) and on failure. Include example responses.
• Add error handling guidance to the description: 'Returns validation errors with field paths and constraint violations. If auto-correction succeeds, returns corrected_input; otherwise, returns error details for the LLM to fix and retry.'
• Constrain the 'expected_schema' parameter with format guidance: 'A valid JSON Schema object (draft-07 or later). Must include type and properties fields. Invalid schemas return a validation error.'
• Consider whether this tool belongs in an agent's capability set. If it is internal MCP plumbing, move it to a separate diagnostic/debug server. If it is user-facing, document when an agent should call it (e.g., 'Call before invoking untrusted tool definitions').
• Add idempotency guarantee: 'This tool is idempotent, repeated calls with the same inputs return identical results. Safe to retry on transient failures.'