`sequentialthinking`'s tool definition costs ~921 tokens/session; about half duplicates the schema's own parameter descriptions

The server advertises one tool whose definition costs ~921 tokens (tiktoken cl100k; ~566 of that is the description). Every session that connects the server pays this whether the tool is used or not.

Two description sections look droppable at no semantic cost: "Parameters explained" restates the description that all 9 inputSchema parameters already carry (clients send both, so the text is paid twice), and "Key features" describes the tool's virtues rather than when to call it. Keeping the intro + "When to use this tool" yields the same selection signal at ~463 tokens (50% less) — measured on the published package, method + script: https://github.com/lCrazyblindl/lap/blob/main/docs/UPSTREAM-ISSUES.md.

Happy to send the trim as a PR if the direction sounds right. (Disclosure: I maintain lap, the measurement tool used; MIT, no product.)

Start with the published sequentialthinking package's tool definition and read docs/UPSTREAM-ISSUES.md for the measurement method and script. Remove the duplicated “Parameters explained” and “Key features” sections while retaining the intro and “When to use this tool,” then rerun the measurement to confirm the definition is about 50% smaller.