Two tools with clear, action-oriented names and detailed descriptions. Both have complete input schemas with typed parameters and enums. cookie_jar uses verb_noun naming (good), descriptions are 150-200 chars (within baseline), and parameters are well-constrained. smash_jar includes a deliberate confirmation pattern (SMASH enum) to prevent accidental destruction. However, output schemas are not documented, LLMs cannot infer what fields are returned. Error handling guidance is absent; no recovery hints for failure cases. Tool composition is sound (separate concerns), but missing pagination/result limits documentation and response field details.

• Document output schemas for both tools. Example: cookie_jar returns {count: number, last_action: string, timestamp: ISO8601}. smash_jar returns {status: 'destroyed', erased_events: number}.
• Add error handling guidance to descriptions: 'If the jar is locked, retry after 5 seconds. If count exceeds 500, reduce and retry.'
• Clarify cookie_jar 'count' semantics: 'How many cookies to add or eat (relative change, not absolute). E.g., add 5 increases count by 5; eat 3 decreases by 3.'
• Add a confirmation pattern to cookie_jar for destructive actions (e.g., 'refill' should require confirm='REFILL' if it clears history).
• Document result limits and pagination: 'History returns up to 100 most recent events. Use offset/limit params for older events.'