debug.step_out

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that stepping out resumes execution until the current function returns, that the debugger will pause at the caller, or any side effects like frame destruction. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, concise sentence that gets the point across without unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness to improve completeness.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 optional param, no output schema), the description lacks essential context such as the requirement for the debugger to be paused, the effect on execution flow, and the expected state after the step. This incompleteness could lead an agent to misuse the tool.

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 has one optional parameter (`thread_id`) with a description, giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no further meaning about the parameter, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 'Step out of current frame' uses a standard debugging verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'step_into' and 'step_over' without needing elaboration, though a slightly more explicit explanation could improve clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., step_into, step_over). The description does not mention prerequisites like the debugger being in a paused state or what to expect after stepping out.

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