This is an educational worksheet, not a production MCP server. Tool definitions are present with schemas and descriptions, but lack depth. All 6 tools have basic descriptions (10-100 chars, below the 194-char baseline) and minimal parameter documentation. No error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, and no security considerations. Tools are read-only (low risk) but descriptions are terse and lack context for when/why to use them. Naming is verb-first (good), but parameter descriptions are sparse. No evidence of pagination, batching, or composition patterns.

• Expand tool descriptions to 50 - 150 chars. Example: 'read_file: Retrieve the full text content of a file at the given path. Use this to examine code, configs, or documentation. Returns the raw file content as a string. Fails if the file does not exist or is not readable.'
• Document output schemas explicitly. E.g., 'list_runbooks returns a string with one runbook name per line, sorted alphabetically.' For structured responses, define JSON fields: {"runbooks": ["name1", "name2"], "count": 2}.
• Add parameter descriptions for all inputs. E.g., 'prefix (string, required): Directory path to search under. Must be a valid relative or absolute path. Returns all files and subdirectories under this prefix, sorted.'
• Add error handling guidance. E.g., 'If the file does not exist, returns an error with the path and suggests checking list_files to verify the correct path.'
• Specify result limits and pagination. E.g., 'list_files returns up to 100 items. For larger directories, use offset and limit parameters (not yet implemented).' This sets expectations and guides future expansion.