jdwp-mcp

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

No annotations provided. Description fails to disclose that this resumes execution temporarily, blocks until the next line/function entry, or what happens if the program terminates during the step. Omits behavioral traits critical for a debugger control operation.

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?

Extremely terse (3 words). While front-loaded, the brevity constitutes under-specification rather than effective conciseness given the complexity of debugger stepping operations.

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?

Lacks annotations and output schema. Description provides no information about success/failure signals, execution state changes, or thread management behavior expected of a stepping operation.

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 100% (thread_id documented as hex string). Description adds no parameter context, but baseline 3 applies when schema coverage is high. No additional semantic value provided.

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?

States the action ('Step into') but lacks domain context (debugging/execution) and scope (current thread vs specific thread). Implicitly distinguishes from step_over/step_out siblings via 'into' keyword but doesn't explicitly clarify the difference.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus debug.step_over or debug.step_out. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., must be paused) or thread selection behavior.

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