Single tool 'echo_lines' has minimal definition quality. Description is present but generic (18 chars: 'Return a verbose echo of the given query'). Input schema exists with basic structure but lacks depth. No output schema documented. No error handling guidance. No parameter constraints or validation hints. Tool does not follow verb_noun naming convention clearly and lacks context for when/why an LLM should use it. Definition quality is well below production baseline.

• Expand tool description to 50-150 chars. Example: 'Echo back the input query with verbose formatting. Useful for testing tool integration and verifying input transmission. Returns the query string with line breaks preserved.'
• Document the output schema explicitly. Specify: does it return {"echo": string}? {"lines": string[]}? {"output": string, "line_count": int}? Make this clear in the tool definition.
• Add parameter constraints to 'query': min length, max length, allowed character set. Example: 'The query string to echo (1-10000 chars, UTF-8).'
• Add error handling guidance: 'Returns error if query exceeds 10000 chars or contains null bytes. On error, the LLM should truncate and retry.'
• Rename tool to clarify intent. If it echoes input verbatim, consider 'echo_query' or 'test_echo'. If it processes lines, 'split_lines_and_echo' is clearer.