Critical failures across all three tools. Tool definitions appear to be inferred from a Makefile rather than explicitly registered in source code. No actual tool implementation visible, only names, descriptions, and schemas listed in metadata. Input schemas are present but lack proper JSON Schema structure (missing 'type' declarations on parent objects). Descriptions are generic and under 100 chars. No evidence of parameter validation, error handling, or output schema documentation. This server cannot be evaluated as production-ready.

• Explicitly register all tools in Python source code (e.g., via a tools registry or decorator) with full JSON Schema definitions. Do not rely on Makefile metadata.
• Add 'type': 'object' to parent input schemas and ensure all parameters have 'type' declarations (string, number, array, etc.).
• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 characters. Include: what the tool does, when to use it (vs similar tools), and what it returns. Example: 'Perform arithmetic operations (add, subtract, multiply, divide) on numeric arrays. Returns a single result number. Use when you need to combine or transform numeric values.'
• Document output schemas for each tool. Example for basic_math: 'Returns {"result": number, "operation": string, "operands_count": number}'.
• Add parameter constraints: operation should be an enum ['add', 'subtract', 'multiply', 'divide']; precision should have min/max bounds (e.g., 0-10).