VLA provides 20 tools with complete JSON schemas and basic descriptions, but quality is inconsistent. All tools have input schemas with type definitions and descriptions, meeting baseline requirements. However, descriptions are often generic (10-50 chars) and lack actionable context for LLM selection. Tool naming follows verb_noun convention (read_file, write_file, git_commit) but lacks specificity in some cases (hover, diagnostics). No output schemas are documented. Error handling is present but minimal, test code shows error strings like 'Error:' and 'escapes' without recovery guidance. Security concerns: write_file, update_file, delete_file, and git_commit are high-risk operations with no permission gates or confirmation patterns. Memory tools (memory_save, memory_search, memory_delete) lack documented data model and retention policies. LSP tools (go_to_definition, find_references, hover, diagnostics) are underdocumented, unclear what language/project context they operate on.

• Document output schemas for all tools. Define typed response objects (e.g., FileReadResult with fields: content, size, truncated, error). Include in tool registration and descriptions.
• Add confirmation/dry-run patterns to destructive tools. Implement a 'confirm' parameter or separate 'preview_*' variants (e.g., preview_delete_file) so agents can verify before executing.
• Enhance error messages with recovery guidance. Replace 'Error: ...' with structured errors: {error: 'file_not_found', message: 'File not found at path/to/file. Try list_files() to see available files.', retryable: false}.
• Document LSP tool context and prerequisites. Add descriptions explaining: language support (Go, Python, etc.), required LSP server setup, file/project scope, and when to use each tool vs. others.
• Add permission gates and audit logging. Implement role-based access control (read-only vs. write) and log all tool invocations with user, timestamp, parameters, and result for compliance.