Single tool with complete schema and reasonable description, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and error handling. The process_invoice tool has a well-structured input schema with nested objects and array items, but lacks descriptions for several nested properties (e.g., the 'invoice' parameter itself has no description). Output schema is not documented. No error recovery guidance. Tool naming is clear (verb_noun pattern), but the server lacks composition patterns for multi-step workflows (approve/reject/status tools exist in durable_sync_mcp but not visible in the evaluated server.py). Conservative scoring reflects STDIO transport limitations and incomplete parameter documentation.

• Add descriptions to all parameters, including the 'invoice' wrapper object. Example: 'invoice: The invoice object containing ID, customer name, and line items to process.'
• Document the output schema in the tool description. Example: 'Returns an object with workflow_id (string) and run_id (string) needed for status checks and approval/rejection.'
• Add error handling with recovery guidance. Wrap client.start_workflow in try/except; return actionable errors like 'Failed to connect to Temporal server at {address}. Ensure TEMPORAL_ADDRESS is set and the server is running.'
• Include all related tools (approve_invoice, reject_invoice, invoice_status) in the same server so agents can complete the full workflow without tool discovery gaps.
• Add validation for due_date format (ISO 8601) and amount (positive number). Return clear validation errors: 'Invalid due_date: must be ISO 8601 format (e.g., 2024-06-30T00:00:00Z)' instead of letting Pydantic raise a generic error.

Inferred effective spec: 2026-07-28+.

• Current-spec patterns present: Multi Round-Trip Requests