Server has 7 well-named tools with clear descriptions (avg 180 chars, within baseline 194). All tools have input schemas with types and descriptions. However, output schemas are not formally documented, responses are text-based markdown rather than structured JSON. Error handling is present but inconsistent: some tools return errText() with guidance, others lack recovery hints. Tool composition is strong (each does one thing), but parameter descriptions could be more prescriptive about formats and constraints. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint) despite all being read-only operations.

• Add formal output schemas to all tools. Instead of returning markdown text, return structured JSON with typed fields (e.g., {endpoints: [{operationId, method, path, scope, ...}], total: number}). Document these schemas in tool definitions.
• Declare readOnlyHint=true on all 7 tools via tool annotations. This signals to agents that these calls are safe to retry and cache, improving efficiency.
• Enhance parameter descriptions with explicit constraints: 'language: one of python|javascript|go|curl, generates complete, runnable code snippet in that language' and 'ttlSeconds: JWT lifetime in seconds, 1 - 60 (default 30)'.
• Add recovery hints to error responses in sign_request and verify_signature. E.g., 'JWT verification failed. Ensure: (1) secretKey matches the one used to sign, (2) rawBody is identical to what was signed, (3) query params are in the same order.'
• Verify and document the goldpopcon://openapi.yaml resource. If implemented, add a resource handler example; if not, remove the declaration to avoid false capability claims.