debug_continue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions defaulting to last-stopped thread, but doesn't disclose side effects (e.g., does it resume all threads? What if debuggee is running? Are there conditions where continuation fails?). Insufficient 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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. Front-loaded with key action. Could be expanded without losing conciseness, but it's efficient.

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 no output schema and minimal description, the tool is simple but missing context like prerequisites (debuggee must be stopped), error conditions, or what happens if threadId is invalid. Acceptable for a straightforward continuation action, but could be more complete.

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%, so the parameter is already well-documented. The description adds that omitting threadId uses the last-stopped thread, which adds value beyond the schema's description. Baseline 3 with slight bonus.

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 resumes debuggee execution and defaults to the last-stopped thread. It's specific about the verb (Resume) and resource (debuggee), but could be more explicit about the effect (e.g., continues from the current breakpoint). It distinguishes from siblings like debug_pause and debug_step.

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 on when to use vs alternatives like debug_step or debug_pause. It doesn't state that the debuggee must be in a stopped state for continuation, nor does it mention what happens if no thread is stopped. Implied usage is minimal.

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