Lab provides 10 well-named tools with consistent verb_noun patterns (lab_analyze, lab_validate, lab_list, etc.). All tools have descriptions (avg ~150 chars, within 10-1024 baseline). Input schemas are present with type definitions and parameter descriptions. However, output schemas are not documented in the visible code, LLMs cannot predict return structure. Parameter descriptions are adequate but lack format constraints (e.g., 'event' enum values are listed in description but not as JSON Schema enum). Error handling is minimal, no recovery guidance or actionable error messages visible. Tool composition is sound (each does one thing), but some tools could be more granular (e.g., lab_secrets_pull and lab_secrets_init are separate, which is good). No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint) despite clear risk classifications in metadata.

• Document output schemas for all tools. Add @returns or 'Returns' section to each tool description with field names, types, and structure. Example: 'Returns {jobs: [{name: string, stage: string, image: string}], stages: [string]}'.
• Convert 'event' parameter in lab_dry_run to JSON Schema enum: {"enum": ["push", "merge_request_event", "schedule", "web", "api", "trigger"]}. Remove from description text.
• Add tool annotations to MCP registration: lab_secrets_pull and lab_secrets_init should include destructiveHint=true; all read-only tools should include readOnlyHint=true.
• Add error handling guidance to descriptions. Example: 'If .gitlab-ci.yml is invalid, lab_validate will return a parse error. Check syntax with lab_list first.'
• Clarify lab_secrets_pull input: add optional parameters for project_id, group_id, or auto-detect from current directory. Document how the tool determines scope.