Two tools with basic schemas and minimal descriptions. Both tools have input schemas with proper types (number, string enum), but descriptions are extremely short (10-40 chars), falling well below the 50-200 char baseline for LLM-optimized descriptions. No output schemas documented. Error handling is minimal (divide-by-zero check in 'calculate' returns plain text, not structured error guidance). Tool names lack action verbs ('add' and 'calculate' are weak; 'perform_addition' and 'perform_calculation' would be clearer). No parameter descriptions beyond type hints. Schemas are present but sparse.

• Expand tool descriptions to 50-200 chars. Example for 'add': 'Adds two numbers and returns their sum. Use this for simple addition when you need a single numeric result. Returns the sum as a number.'
• Add parameter descriptions in Zod schema or via McpServer metadata. Example: 'a: First number to add (any real number)', 'b: Second number to add (any real number)'.
• Document output schema explicitly. Add a comment or metadata: 'Returns: {content: [{type: "text", text: string}]} where text is the numeric result as a string.'
• Improve error handling in 'calculate'. Return structured errors: {error: 'division_by_zero', message: 'Cannot divide by zero. Ensure the second operand (b) is non-zero.'} instead of plain text.
• Rename tools to verb-first pattern: 'add' → 'perform_addition', 'calculate' → 'perform_arithmetic'. This makes intent clearer to LLMs and aligns with production tool naming baselines.