debugger_step_out

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does it well: it discloses that the pause is held between steps, that the pause is auto-released after maxPauseMs, and that new location/scope can be retrieved via debugger_get_state and debugger_get_scope. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond a simple action statement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences, each carrying distinct information: the operation, the pause lifecycle behavior, and how to observe the result. No filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a parameter-free tool with no output schema, the description covers the key post-conditions and where to find results. It does not explicitly state that the debugger must already be paused or what happens if it is not, and the phrase 'stop at the next statement' could be more precise about exiting the current function, but the overall guidance is sufficient for most calls.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema already fully covers this, so no parameter explanation is needed. The description's mention of maxPauseMs refers to a behavior/timing detail rather than a tool parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action with 'Step out from the current pause' and gives a concrete result: 'stop at the next statement.' It clearly belongs to the debugger stepping family and is distinguishable from step_over/step_into by the operation named, though it does not explicitly contrast with those siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given about when to choose step_out over step_over or step_into. The description explains pause-holding behavior but does not state the common use case, such as exiting the current function to return to a caller, nor any exclusions or alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.