Praxa demonstrates strong schema discipline with complete JSON Schema definitions for all 12 tools, proper type constraints, and consistent naming conventions (aura_* prefix). Tool descriptions are present and contextually appropriate (avg ~80 chars), explaining intent and policy implications. However, parameter descriptions are largely absent, most schema properties lack 'description' fields, forcing LLMs to infer meaning from names alone. Error handling and recovery guidance are not visible in the tool definitions. Output schemas are not documented. The server shows good foundational structure but lacks the parameter-level documentation and error guidance expected of production-grade tools.

• Add 'description' field to every schema property. For example, 'intent' in aura_submit_intent should have: {"type": "string", "minLength": 1, "maxLength": 4000, "description": "Natural-language intent statement for deterministic compilation (1-4000 chars)"}.
• Document output schemas for all tools. Add an 'outputSchema' field to each tool definition specifying the structure of the response (e.g., {"type": "object", "properties": {"runId": {"type": "string", "format": "uuid"}, "status": {"type": "string"}}, "required": ["runId", "status"]}).
• Define goalSpec and payload structures explicitly. Replace bare 'type: object' with a detailed schema showing required and optional fields, or provide a reference to a shared definition.
• Add error handling guidance to tool descriptions. Specify common failure modes (e.g., 'Returns 404 if mission not found; retry with a valid runId') and recovery steps.
• Implement a confirmation pattern for aura_cancel_mission. Add a 'dryRun' parameter (default false) or require a separate 'confirm_cancel_mission' tool that takes a confirmation token from the initial cancel request.