The 'better_thinking' tool has a well-structured schema with comprehensive parameter documentation and thoughtful design reflecting cognitive modeling. However, the tool serves a narrow, single-purpose function (internal reasoning articulation) that doesn't align with traditional MCP tool patterns. The description is excellent and detailed (287 chars), parameters are all properly typed with descriptions, and the schema is complete with validation logic visible in the source code. The tool lacks error handling guidance for LLM recovery and does not follow verb_noun naming conventions ('better_thinking' is a noun phrase rather than 'think_step' or similar action verb). The implementation shows mature input validation in the TypeScript source but lacks actionable error messages for common misuse cases.

• Rename tool from 'better_thinking' to a verb_noun pair such as 'think_step' or 'reason_through' to signal the action performed.
• Enhance error messages with actionable recovery guidance. Example: 'Invalid thoughtNumber: got 5 but totalThoughts is 3. Ensure thoughtNumber <= totalThoughts, or update totalThoughts if more steps are needed.'
• Document what the tool returns (structured thought metadata, thought history tracking, branch state) so agents understand how to use output in subsequent prompts.
• Consider whether this tool should be a prompt extension rather than a tool. If the intent is to scaffold LLM reasoning within a single turn, a system prompt or tool use annotation may be more appropriate than a callable tool.
• Add examples in documentation showing typical reasoning sequences (e.g., linear thinking, branching, revision patterns) to help agents understand when and how to invoke the tool.