Critical gaps across all dimensions. Tool definitions are severely underdeveloped. Two tools share the identical name 'get_report' with different schemas, creating ambiguity. Descriptions are minimal (10-50 chars, well below the 194-char baseline). Input schemas lack parameter descriptions entirely, LLMs cannot understand what each field controls. No output schemas documented. The 'add-note' tool has a basic schema but no guidance on format or constraints. No error handling, validation rules, or recovery guidance. The server exposes internal state management (notes dict) without explaining how it persists or what the resource URIs mean. Code snippet is incomplete (truncated at 'mimeTyp'), preventing full assessment of resource implementation.

• Rename one 'get_report' tool to disambiguate (e.g., 'generate_report' vs 'get_report'). Ensure names follow verb_noun pattern and are distinct.
• Add parameter descriptions to all schemas. For 'query': 'Research topic or question (string, 1-500 chars)'. For 'report_type': 'Type of report to generate (enum: research_report, summary_report, detailed_analysis). Defaults to research_report if omitted.'
• Document output schemas. E.g., get_report returns {report: string, sources: [string], metadata: {query: string, report_type: string, generated_at: ISO8601}}.
• Expand tool descriptions to 50-200 chars. E.g., 'Generate a research report on a given topic using GPT-Researcher. Supports multiple report types (research_report, summary_report, detailed_analysis). Returns full report text and source citations.'
• Add error handling: validate report_type against allowed enum; return 'Invalid report_type: got "X". Must be one of: research_report, summary_report, detailed_analysis.' Include timeout guidance and retry hints for transient failures.