jdwp-mcp

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

No annotations provided, yet description fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: that this operation mutates execution state (advances PC), temporarily resumes then pauses execution, or what occurs if thread_id is omitted. Missing safety/prerequisites context.

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) with zero redundancy. However, brevity crosses into under-specification for a complex debugging operation. Front-loaded but incomplete.

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?

Missing essential context for a debugger control tool: no output schema disclosure, no explanation of execution side effects, no thread selection behavior, and no error conditions. Incomplete for safe agent invocation.

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 has 100% coverage with thread_id documented as 'hex e.g. 0x1a2b, optional'. Description mentions no parameters, but baseline 3 applies since schema adequately documents the single optional parameter without description assistance.

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 basic action ('step over') and scope ('next line'), but fails to distinguish from siblings like step_into or step_out. Assumes familiarity with debugger terminology without clarifying the semantics (skipping over function calls).

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 step_over versus step_into (enter functions) or step_out (finish current function). Does not mention prerequisites such as requiring an attached debug session or suspended thread.

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