Server has 16 tools with complete input schemas and descriptions. Naming follows verb_noun convention (search_, get_, list_, create_, compose_, deploy_, execute_). Descriptions are present and contextual (avg ~120 chars), meeting baseline minimums. However, output schemas are entirely undocumented, no tool declares what fields it returns, forcing LLMs to guess downstream field names. Parameter descriptions are adequate but lack constraints (enums, ranges, formats). Error handling is not visible in the code sample. Credential handling is thoughtful (secrets never exposed), but destructive operations (delete_data_table) lack confirmation patterns. Tool composition is sound, tools chain logically (search → get_details → compose → deploy). Overall: solid foundation with significant gaps in output documentation and error guidance.

• Document output schemas for all 16 tools. Example: search_n8n_nodes should return {nodes: [{n8nType: string, label: string, relevanceScore: number, description: string}], total: number}. Include field descriptions so LLMs know what each field means.
• Add min/max constraints to numeric parameters: limit (1 - 100), page (1 - 1000). Use JSON Schema minimum/maximum properties and repeat in descriptions.
• Implement confirmation pattern for delete_data_table: add a 'confirm' boolean parameter (default false) or return a confirmation token that must be passed in a second call.
• Add error handling middleware that returns structured errors: {code: string, message: string, recoveryHint: string}. Example: 'credential_not_found: Credential "openAiApi" not found. Call list_credentials() to see available types.'
• For create_credential, either embed the schema inline (properties: {apiKey: {type: string}, ...}) or require calling get_credential_schema first and document this dependency in the description.