Anchor Agent provides 10 tools with complete input schemas and descriptions. Naming follows verb_noun convention (list_, use_, claim_, get_, read_, search_, report_, submit_, request_). Descriptions are present and contextual (avg ~120 chars), explaining WHAT each tool does and WHEN to use it. However, parameter descriptions are sparse or missing context about constraints, formats, and dependencies. Output schemas are not documented, LLMs cannot predict response structure. Error handling is minimal; no recovery guidance or categorization. Tool composition is sound (single responsibility), but some tools like claim_task conflate multiple concerns (claiming + optional branch association). Security considerations are present (read-only vs write risk classification) but not formalized in descriptions.

• Document output schemas for all tools. Example: 'list_connections returns {connections: [{id: string, name: string, active: boolean}], selectedConnectionId: string}'.
• Add min/max bounds to numeric parameters: search_workspace.maxResults (1-100), report_progress.percentage (0-100).
• Expand parameter descriptions with format/constraint details. E.g., 'stage: A short label (1-50 chars) describing the current phase (e.g., "analyzing", "generating", "refining")'.
• Add error handling guidance to write tools. E.g., 'submit_revision: On conflict, returns {error: "document_changed", currentVersion: number}. Retry with updated basedOnDocumentVersion or call read_document to refresh.'
• Document parameter dependencies explicitly. E.g., 'read_document: If mode=snapshot, uri must match the task's original file. If mode=current, uri can be any workspace file.'