step_over

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

Annotations only provide the title, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that execution pauses at the next line, that function calls are not entered, and that the new call stack position is returned. This is adequate but does not mention potential edge cases (e.g., behavior at function boundaries) or that execution must already be paused.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action, concise, and contains no fluff. 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 that there are no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's behavior and return value. It is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to understand how to use it correctly.

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 input schema is empty (0 parameters), so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description does not need to explain parameters as there are none.

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 tool's action: execute the current line and pause at the next line. It explicitly notes that it does not enter function calls, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like step_into. The return value (new call stack position) is also stated.

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 gives clear context for when to use: when you want to execute a line without stepping into function calls. The phrase 'does not enter function calls' serves as a when-not condition, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools like step_into or step_out. However, the implied usage is clear.

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