Four tools with complete schemas and basic descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and output schema clarity. All tools expose accessToken as a required parameter, a critical security violation. Descriptions are minimal (10-30 chars) and lack context on when to use each tool or what they return. No output schemas documented. Parameter descriptions are generic ('Google API access token', 'Document ID to update'). No error handling guidance. Naming is clear (verb_noun pattern), but the security flaw and missing output documentation severely limit production readiness.

• Remove accessToken from all tool parameters. Implement server-side OAuth token injection: store the user's Google credentials in a secure vault (e.g., environment variable, AWS Secrets Manager) and inject them into API calls inside the handler functions. Update tool descriptions to note that authentication is handled server-side.
• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., search_docs should return {docs: [{id, title, mimeType, createdTime}], totalResults: number}. Include field types and descriptions so LLMs know what to extract for downstream calls.
• Expand tool descriptions to 50 - 150 characters. E.g., 'Search for Google Docs in your Drive by title or content. Returns up to maxResults docs with ID, title, and creation date. Use this to find existing docs before appending or updating.'
• Add parameter constraints and format hints. E.g., 'maxResults: Maximum number of docs to return (1 - 100, default 10)' and 'documentId: Google Docs document ID (format: alphanumeric string, e.g., from create_doc response)'.
• Add error handling guidance to tool descriptions. E.g., 'If no docs match the query, try a broader search term or check that the user has access to the Drive. If authentication fails, verify the access token is valid and has drive.readonly scope.'