dbg_step

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, state changes, or prerequisites (like requiring a paused thread). The effect of 'stepping' is implicit but lacks explicit detail on what happens during execution.

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?

The description is extremely concise: a single sentence with parameter enumeration. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Step', making the tool's action immediately clear. Every word adds value.

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?

Given the complexity of a debugging step operation, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, prerequisite conditions, and behavior after stepping. With no output schema and sparse annotations, more information is needed for full comprehension.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds value by listing valid values for 'kind' and 'granularity'. However, it does not explain the meaning of each option (e.g., 'over' vs 'into'), nor does it describe the 'session_id' 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 clearly states the verb 'Step' and the resource 'current thread'. It also enumerates the parameter options for 'kind' and 'granularity', making the tool's function unambiguous. Among sibling tools, it stands out as the only stepping operation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dbg_continue or dbg_pause. No context on prerequisites (e.g., thread must be paused) or situations where other tools are preferred is given.

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