Two simple, well-named tools with clear descriptions and complete input schemas. Naming follows verb_noun convention (crc32, adler32 are algorithm names, not verbs, minor deviation). Descriptions are concise (90 - 130 chars, within 10 - 1024 baseline) and explain what each tool does, when to use it, and that they are keyless/offline. Input schemas are properly typed with required fields and parameter descriptions. However, output schemas are not documented, LLMs cannot predict the response structure (algorithm, value, hex fields). No error handling guidance, no parameter constraints (e.g., max text length), and no tool annotations (readOnlyHint). Tools are READ_ONLY but lack explicit annotation. No pagination or result limits documented (though text input is naturally bounded). Overall: solid foundation, but missing output documentation and error recovery patterns.

• Document output schema in tool descriptions or via a separate schema field: 'Returns {algorithm: string, value: number, hex: string}'.
• Add readOnlyHint: true to both tool definitions to signal to agents that these are safe, idempotent, read-only operations.
• Add error handling guidance: 'If text encoding fails, the tool will return an error. Ensure input is valid UTF-8.'
• Specify input constraints in parameter description: 'The text to checksum (UTF-8, max 1MB recommended for performance).'
• Consider adding an example in the description: 'E.g., crc32("hello") returns {algorithm: "crc32", value: 907060870, hex: "361b0e66"}' to help LLMs understand output format.