Only 2 tools visible in source; both have descriptions and basic schemas. However, descriptions are minimal (under 100 chars), parameter descriptions lack detail, and no output schemas are documented. The server registers many tools (management, status, print-control, hardware, files, camera, gcode, signing, cloud) but source code for most is not provided, preventing full evaluation. Naming follows verb_noun convention (change_filament, unload_filament) but lacks specificity about side effects. No error handling guidance, no idempotent hints, no permission gates visible. STDIO transport caps protocol readiness at 50.

• Document output schema for each tool. Example: change_filament should return {success: boolean, printer_id: string, tray: number, previous_filament: string, new_filament: string, time_remaining_seconds: number}.
• Expand parameter descriptions with format and constraint details. E.g., 'Printer ID: UUID (e.g., 550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000) or printer name. Omit for single-printer setup.'
• Add error guidance to descriptions. E.g., 'If printer is offline, returns error code PRINTER_UNREACHABLE. Retry after checking network connectivity.'
• Implement confirmation pattern for destructive operations. Add optional 'dry_run: boolean' parameter or require explicit 'confirm: true' for filament changes.
• Provide source code or schema definitions for all 9+ registered tool modules (management, status, print-control, hardware, files, camera, gcode, signing, cloud) to enable full evaluation.