step_over

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

With no annotations, the description explains that on a CALL, the entire function executes and returns to the next instruction. It does not detail behavior for non-CALL instructions or error conditions, but the main behavioral trait is well covered.

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 three sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the action and includes a required precondition and alternative tool, all concisely.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params with full schema, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains usage and behavior. It covers the key precondition and distinguishes from siblings. Minor omission: what happens on non-CALL instructions, but overall 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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage for both parameters with descriptions. The description does not add extra semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'step OVER' and resource 'instructions', clearly distinguishing itself from sibling step_into by explaining the difference. It explicitly states the action and scope.

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 description explicitly requires session state 'paused' and tells when to use step_into instead, providing clear context and alternatives.

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