step_over

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the action ('step over') but does not disclose behavioral details such as required editor state (must be in debug mode), error cases (e.g., not paused), or side effects (executes the line). Adequate for a simple action but lacks full state transparency.

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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and condition. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and condition. However, it omits the requirement that the editor must be in debug mode and that a breakpoint must be hit. For a zero-param tool, this is nearly complete, lacking only explicit state prerequisites.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for zero parameters is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('step over the current line') with a clear condition ('when paused at a breakpoint'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'step_into' (steps into functions) and 'continue_execution' (resumes, doesn't step).

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?

The description implies usage context (debugging, paused at breakpoint) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'step_into' or 'continue_execution'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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