Two tools with basic verb-noun naming (get-eth-balance, send-eth) but significant quality gaps. Both tools have minimal descriptions (under 100 chars) that lack context on when to use them, prerequisites, or return value details. Input schemas are present with Zod validation but parameter descriptions are sparse and lack format/constraint details. No output schema documentation. Critical security issue: send-eth is IRREVERSIBLE but lacks confirmation/dry-run pattern. No error recovery guidance. Baseline: production tools average 194 chars for descriptions and 72 chars per param; these fall well short.

• Expand tool descriptions to 100-200 chars. For send-eth: 'Transfers ETH from the configured wallet to a recipient address. Requires sufficient balance. Irreversible, confirm amount and recipient before calling. Returns transaction hash on success.'
• Add parameter constraints: address must be 0x-prefixed 40-char hex; amount must be numeric string (e.g., '1.5') representing ETH, not wei. Document in descriptions.
• Implement confirmation pattern for send-eth: add a dry_run parameter (default false) that validates balance and returns estimated gas without executing, or require explicit confirmation via a separate confirm_transaction tool.
• Document output schema explicitly. E.g., get-eth-balance returns {content: [{type: 'text', text: string}]}. send-eth returns {content: [{type: 'text', text: string}]} with tx hash or error reason.
• Add actionable error messages. Instead of returning raw error objects, parse and return: 'Insufficient balance: need X ETH, have Y ETH' or 'Invalid address format: must be 0x-prefixed 40-char hex'.