The 'guide' tool has a well-defined schema with proper types and descriptions for both parameters (query: string, top_k: integer with minimum constraint). The tool description is clear and actionable (97 chars), explaining both the discovery function and the no-query listing mode. However, the server exposes only ONE tool, a meta-discovery tool rather than domain-specific capabilities. The guide tool itself is well-crafted, but it is a wrapper/framework tool, not a functional tool that performs real work. Output schema is not documented in the source code provided. The tool is read-only (no state mutation), which is appropriate. No error handling guidance is visible in the schema or description.

• Document the output schema for 'guide' in the tool definition. Specify the structure of matched tools (e.g., array of {name, description, full_schema} objects) so LLMs know what to extract.
• Add error handling guidance to the description: 'If no tools match your query, try a simpler or more general description. Call with no query to see all available tools.'
• Add a maximum constraint to top_k (e.g., 'maximum 50') to prevent runaway queries and excessive output.
• Consider whether this framework should be evaluated as a tool provider or a meta-tool. If it is meant to wrap other servers, provide example usage showing how a real domain server (e.g., email, calendar) would be wrapped and exposed.
• Add a note in the description about the three exposure modes (Dynamic, StaticLean, DeferredSchema) so users understand which mode is active and what to expect.