Both tools have minimal descriptions (under 100 chars) and critically lack parameter descriptions. Input schemas are present but parameters have no type information beyond 'string'. No output schemas documented. Error handling returns raw text without recovery guidance. Tools combine security + billing concerns, violating single-responsibility principle. No idempotency guarantees, no pagination, no structured output. Naming is generic ('secure-execute', 'secure-web-execute'), does not clearly convey what action occurs.

• Add parameter description for 'payload': 'The command or action to execute. Format: [specify expected syntax, shell command, JSON object, YAML, etc.]. Max length: [specify]. Examples: [provide 2-3 realistic examples, not generic placeholders].'
• Document output schema explicitly. Example: 'Returns {content: [{type: "text", text: string}], isError: boolean}. On success, text contains execution result and cost. On error, text contains reason and recovery hint.'
• Rename tools to action-verb format: 'execute_command' (STDIO) and 'execute_web_command' (SSE). Clarify in descriptions what 'web' means (e.g., 'Executes commands in a web-safe sandbox with CORS restrictions').
• Split tools into three: (1) scan_payload (security check only), (2) authorize_execution (billing check only), (3) execute_payload (run command). Allows agents to compose and retry independently.
• Enhance error responses with recovery guidance. Example: 'SECURITY_VIOLATION: Malicious pattern detected (rm -rf). Rewrite command without destructive operations. Allowed: read, list, query operations.' Include error code, constraint violated, and next action.