Ironfang

The dotted namespaces and very detailed descriptions make most tools clearly distinct, even across Audit, Finance, Render, and Rig. Minor overlap remains among render creation tools (batch vs. individual screenshot/PDF jobs, signed_url vs. screenshot) and among the three usage/connection reporting tools, but descriptions generally resolve it.

Tools follow a highly predictable product.resource.action pattern with snake_case, e.g. audit.audit.create, render.destination.delete, rig.run.finish. A few actions are noun-like (rig.connector.status, rig.evidence.receipt) and audit.audit.* is slightly redundant, but the convention is otherwise stable.

49 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and is heavy for an MCP surface, even accounting for multiple product areas (Audit, Finance, Render, Rig). The breadth increases selection cost and makes it harder for an agent to stay within context.

Core workflows are present for audits, renders, and Rig runs, but there are notable lifecycle gaps: no render.job.list or rig.run.list, no update/delete for sites, projects, suites, or templates, no audit.rule.list, and Finance covers only rule lookup with validation/generation explicitly outside MCP. Several gaps are intentional or assistant-facing limits, but the surface is not complete CRUD.