Four tools with complete schemas and descriptions, but quality varies significantly. Echo and add are trivial utilities with minimal descriptions (18-24 chars, below the 50-200 char LLM-optimized baseline). greet_user lacks input schema detail and relies on MRTR elicitation rather than explicit parameters. pixel is underdocumented. Tool names follow verb_noun convention (echo, add, greet_user, pixel) but lack specificity, 'echo' and 'pixel' are generic. No parameter descriptions visible for echo/add beyond type hints. Error handling and output schemas not documented. Composition is reasonable (single responsibility), but descriptions need expansion to guide LLM selection.

• Expand echo description from 'Echo a message back to the caller' to 'Echo a message back to the caller. Useful for testing connectivity and verifying message transmission. Returns the input message unchanged as a text content block.'
• Expand add description to 'Add two numbers and return their sum. Supports integers and floating-point numbers. Returns the numeric result as a structured content block with the sum field.'
• Add parameter descriptions: message → 'The text string to echo back (any length, UTF-8 encoded)'; a → 'First number to add (integer or float)'; b → 'Second number to add (integer or float)'
• Document greet_user input schema explicitly: 'This tool uses Multi Round-Trip Requests (MRTR). It accepts no direct parameters; instead, it returns an inputRequests form asking the user for their name, then re-enters with the user's response.'
• Add output schema documentation for all tools, e.g., 'Returns a JSON object with fields: {result: string, timestamp: ISO8601, type: "echo"}' or similar, so LLMs know what to extract.

Inferred effective spec: 2026-07-28+.

• Relies on Sampling (deprecated) - integrate directly with the LLM provider API