All 13 tools have basic schemas and descriptions, but quality is mediocre. Descriptions are extremely terse (10-50 chars, well below the 194-char baseline for A+ tools). Parameter descriptions are minimal and lack context about constraints, ranges, or when to use each tool. No error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, and no composition hints. Tools are mathematically simple but lack production-grade polish. Naming is acceptable (verb_noun pattern) but descriptions fail to explain WHEN or WHY to call each tool.

• Expand all descriptions to 100-200 chars. Example: 'Add two integers. Returns their sum. Use when combining quantities or accumulating values. Both operands must be integers; result is an integer.'
• Document output schemas explicitly. Add a note like 'Returns: integer (sum of a and b)' or 'Returns: float (square root of a, or error if a < 0)'.
• Add input constraints to parameter descriptions. E.g., 'Divisor (integer, must be non-zero; division by zero will raise ValueError)'.
• Implement error handling with recovery hints. Catch exceptions and return structured errors: {'error': 'Cannot divide by zero', 'suggestion': 'Ensure divisor is non-zero'}.
• Add a discovery tool or resource listing all available math operations with their use cases, so LLMs can reason about which tool to call for a given mathematical task.

Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.

• Relies on Logging (deprecated) - log to stderr or use OpenTelemetry