Server has well-structured tool definitions with complete schemas and descriptions for all 7 tools. Naming follows verb_noun convention (search_notes, get_note, add_note, etc.). All parameters include type definitions and descriptions with constraints (minLength, maxLength, pattern, minimum, maximum). However, descriptions are generic and lack LLM-optimized guidance on WHEN to use each tool vs alternatives. Error handling is minimal, no recovery guidance or actionable error messages visible in tool implementations. Output schemas are not documented. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint) despite clear risk levels. Composition is sound: tools are single-responsibility and chainable (search returns IDs that get_note accepts).

• Expand tool descriptions to 100-150 chars. Add WHEN to use guidance: 'Use search_notes to find notes by keyword. Use list_notes to browse all notes or filter by tag. Use get_note when you have a specific note ID.' This disambiguates similar tools for LLMs.
• Document output schemas for all tools. Example for search_notes: 'Returns array of {id, title, tags, created_at, snippet}. Total count and truncation flag included for pagination.' Include this in tool description or as a separate schema field.
• Add tool annotations to all tool definitions. Mark search_notes, search_faqs, get_note, list_notes with readOnlyHint=true. Mark add_note, update_note with idempotentHint=false (state-changing). Mark delete_note with destructiveHint=true.
• Implement structured error responses with recovery guidance. Example: 'Note not found (ID: note-001). Available notes: [list]. Try list_notes() to find the correct ID.' Return error classification (retryable, user-fixable, fatal) so agents know next steps.
• Add a confirm_delete_note tool or require a confirmation parameter in delete_note. Implement a soft-delete or trash mechanism so deletions can be undone within a grace period. This prevents accidental permanent data loss.