Critical gaps across all dimensions. Tool descriptions are present but minimal (10-30 chars, well below 50-200 char baseline for LLM optimization). Input schemas visible for most tools but lack parameter descriptions, a hard violation of the rubric. No output schemas documented. Parameter types are defined but descriptions are missing or trivial. 5 test tools (test_connection, test_agents, test_llm_mode, test_workflows, test_templates) should not be exposed as production tools. Error handling is absent, no recovery guidance, no categorization. No evidence of idempotency, pagination, or composition patterns. Tool names are reasonable (verb_noun style) but descriptions fail to explain WHEN to use each tool or what it returns.

• Add parameter descriptions to all tools. For 'agent_id' in get_agent_details, write: 'The unique identifier of the agent (string, e.g. "code_reviewer"). Call list_agents() first to discover available IDs.'
• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., list_agents returns {success: bool, agents: [{id: string, name: string, title: string, icon: string, description: string, when_to_use: string, role: string, focus: string}], count: int, current_agent: string|null, message: string}.
• Expand tool descriptions to 80-150 chars. Example: 'Activate a specific BMAD agent by ID. Call list_agents() first to see available agents. Returns success status and the activated agent's details. Idempotent, safe to retry.'
• Remove test tools from production tool set. Move test_connection, test_agents, test_llm_mode, test_workflows, test_templates, run_full_test to a separate internal diagnostics interface or remove entirely.
• Add error handling guidance to write-operation tools (activate_agent, start_workflow). Document: 'Returns {success: bool, error?: string}. If error is "agent_not_found", call list_agents() to verify the ID. If error is "permission_denied", check your role.'