step_overExecute the current line and pause on the next one in the same stack frame, allowing you to skip function calls during Node.js debugging without altering the code.
Execute the current line and pause on the next one in the same frame.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| wait_ms | No | How long to wait (ms) for the process to pause again before returning 'running'. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the core behavior (executes a line, pauses at the next line in the same frame). It omits the prerequisite paused state, what happens if the process is not paused, and the timeout/running-return semantics implied by wait_ms.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to describing the stepping behavior.
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?
No output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone, yet it omits precondition (must be paused), error/edge behavior, and the wait/timeout outcome. For a simple debugger step the core is conveyed, but a few operational gaps remain.
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 description coverage is 100% and the single wait_ms parameter is fully documented in the schema (including default and min/max). The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 for high coverage is appropriate.
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 a specific verb+resource: executes the current line and pauses on the next one, with the scoping qualifier 'in the same frame' that behaviorally distinguishes it from step_into/step_out. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the contrast from 'same frame' rather than being routed.
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 'same frame' phrasing implicitly signals this is the step that does not descend into calls, which is a useful usage cue. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no reference to alternatives like step_into, step_out, or continue, leaving selection to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.