Server has 4 tools with basic descriptions and schemas, but significant quality gaps. Tool naming is inconsistent (clear_note vs add_note vs read_notes vs send_mail, mixing verb_noun with noun patterns). Descriptions are present but generic (10-50 chars for most tools, below the 50-200 char LLM-optimized baseline). Parameter descriptions exist but lack constraints, formats, and validation guidance. Critical security issue: send_mail exposes credentials as parameters. No error handling guidance, no output schemas documented, no pagination support. Schemas are minimal, only message param has description; senderMailId, senderPassword, etc. lack type info in visible schema. Overall pattern adherence is poor.

• Refactor send_mail: move senderMailId and senderPassword to environment variables (SMTP_USER, SMTP_PASSWORD). Accept only recieverMailId, subject, body as parameters. Document: 'Sends email from configured sender account to recipient. Requires SMTP_USER and SMTP_PASSWORD env vars.'
• Add output schema documentation. E.g., read_notes returns {notes: string[], count: number, lastUpdated: ISO8601}. Document what fields agents should expect.
• Expand tool descriptions to 50-150 chars with WHEN to use guidance. E.g., 'Appends a single note to the sticky note file. Use this to record a new item; call read_notes to retrieve all notes.'
• Add parameter constraints. E.g., message param: 'Note content (1-5000 chars, plain text)'. recieverMailId: 'Valid email address (RFC 5322 format)'. subject: 'Email subject (1-200 chars)'.
• Implement error classification in send_mail. Return {success: bool, message: string, errorType: 'auth_failed'|'invalid_recipient'|'timeout'|'unknown'} so LLM knows whether to retry, ask user, or escalate.