28 tools with inconsistent quality. Most have basic descriptions (10-50 chars) and minimal parameter documentation. Input schemas present for ~18 tools but lack depth; many parameters missing type constraints and descriptions. No output schemas documented. Error handling absent. Tool names follow verb_noun convention but descriptions are too terse to guide LLM selection. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint). Composition is reasonable (single responsibility per tool) but chaining support weak, responses don't consistently include IDs needed by downstream tools.

• Add output schemas to all tools. Document return fields, types, and which IDs/references are included for chaining. E.g. create_feature should return {featureId, workspaceId, name, description} so downstream tools can reference them.
• Expand tool descriptions to 50-150 chars. Include WHAT it does, WHEN to use it (vs similar tools), and key prerequisites. E.g. 'Create a new feature in a workspace. Call after init_workspace_in_current_folder. Returns featureId for use in create_tasks.'
• Add tool annotations: mark read-only tools with readOnlyHint=true; destructive tools (delete_*) with destructiveHint=true; idempotent tools with idempotentHint=true. This guides LLM safety reasoning.
• Implement confirmation pattern for destructive operations. E.g. delete_task should return {status: 'confirm_required', taskId, title} and require a confirm_delete_task(taskId, confirmationToken) call. Prevents accidental deletions.
• Enhance parameter descriptions with format/constraint details. E.g. 'priority: one of high|medium|low (default: medium)'; 'workspaceId: UUID or current directory path (optional, defaults to cwd)'; 'markdown: valid markdown, max 10000 chars'.