Server has 4 tools with clear verb-based names and reasonable descriptions (avg 156 chars). All tools have descriptions meeting the 10-1024 char baseline. However, critical gaps exist: (1) input schemas are minimal or absent for most tools, get_board and trigger_tick have empty input objects with no parameter descriptions; (2) output schemas are completely undocumented, no structured response definitions visible in source; (3) parameter descriptions are sparse, resolve_addressed_review_threads and dismiss_stale_bot_reviews accept only a 'pr' string with minimal guidance on format; (4) no error handling guidance or recovery paths documented. Tool names follow verb_noun pattern well (get_, trigger_, resolve_, dismiss_), but lack of schema rigor and output documentation significantly limits LLM usability.

• Document complete output schemas for all tools. For get_board, specify the structure of 'board JSON' (fields, types, nested objects) and 'rendered markdown' (format, length limits). Use JSON Schema or TypeScript interfaces visible in source.
• Add enum constraints or regex patterns to the 'pr' parameter. E.g., 'PR reference: owner/repo#123 (preferred) or https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123. Both formats are accepted and normalized internally.'
• Add error handling guidance to write tools. Document: (1) what happens if the PR is not found (404 vs 403 vs 500?), (2) whether the operation is idempotent (safe to retry?), (3) what the LLM should do on failure (ask user, retry, abort?).
• Document get_board result limits and pagination. E.g., 'Returns up to 1000 board items. For larger boards, use limit and offset parameters (if supported) or implement client-side pagination.'
• Add per-parameter descriptions to empty input schemas. For get_board and trigger_tick, if inputs are truly empty, state this explicitly: 'This tool takes no parameters. Call it to fetch the current board state or trigger a tick cycle.'