Zentao MCP server has significant definition quality gaps. Tool names lack action verbs (my_bugs, bug_detail, resolve_bug, assign_bug, comment_bug, bug_image). Descriptions are present but generic and lack LLM-optimized guidance on when/why to use each tool. Input schemas exist but are minimally documented, most parameters lack descriptions or type constraints. Output schemas are not documented. Error handling is minimal. The server reads credentials from creds.env and manages cookies locally, but no security documentation in tool definitions. Tool composition is reasonable (6 focused tools), but parameter naming inconsistencies (e.g., 'id' vs 'bug_id') and missing enum constraints reduce clarity.

• Rename tools to start with action verbs: 'my_bugs' → 'list_my_bugs', 'bug_detail' → 'get_bug_detail', 'bug_image' → 'download_bug_image'. This signals intent to LLMs and aligns with the 90% baseline of A+ tools.
• Add parameter descriptions for all inputs. Example: 'id: Bug ID as a numeric string (e.g., "12345"). Required.' Include format, range, and examples in the description text, not just the name.
• Document output schemas in tool descriptions. Example for get_bug_detail: 'Returns a structured bug object with fields: id (string), title (string), status (enum: open|assigned|resolved|closed), priority (1-5), severity (1-5), assignedTo (string), resolvedDate (ISO 8601 or null), steps (plaintext), attachments (array of {title, url}), actions (array of {date, actor, action, comment}).'
• Add enum constraints to optional structured fields. Example for resolve_bug: 'rootCause, fix, verify, impact, extra are optional text fields. If all are empty, the comment field is used instead. Provide at least one non-empty field or comment.' This prevents ambiguous calls.
• Enhance error messages with recovery guidance. Example: 'Bug ID not found (got "99999"). Call list_my_bugs() to see available bug IDs, or check the bug number in your Zentao UI.' This enables LLM self-correction.