Four tools with complete schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and error handling guidance. Tool names are action-oriented (transform, score, evaluate, review_pr) and descriptions are substantive (100-200 chars). However, many parameters lack descriptions or constraints. The 'transform' tool has good parameter coverage, but 'evaluate' and 'review_pr' have minimal parameter documentation. No error recovery guidance visible. Output schemas are not formally documented. Composition is reasonable, tools are single-purpose, but chaining support is unclear.

• Add formal output schema documentation for each tool. Example for 'score': 'Returns {score: int, max: int, rows: [[string, int]]}' with field descriptions.
• Convert 'provider' and 'only' parameters to enums in the schema. Define allowed values as JSON Schema enum constraints, not just description text.
• Add error recovery guidance to tool descriptions. Example: 'If ANTHROPIC_API_KEY is not set, set it in your environment before calling this tool.' or 'If the target directory is not found, verify the absolute path and try again.'
• Expand parameter descriptions for 'evaluate' (explain fail_level semantics: 'Pass rate below this threshold triggers an error') and 'review_pr' (clarify GitHub auth requirements, dry_run behavior).
• Document idempotency and side effects. Mark 'transform' and 'review_pr' as destructive/non-idempotent; mark 'score' and 'evaluate' as read-only. This helps agents understand retry safety.