step_over

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses side effects (advances debugger state), prerequisites (active paused session), and return value (confirmation). This is sufficient for a tool with no parameters.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the main action. It includes side effects, prerequisites, returns, and alternatives in three sentences. Could be slightly more concise, but overall 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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, prerequisites, return, and alternatives. It is reasonably complete, though the contradictory line reduces confidence.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description does not need to add parameter info; baseline is 4 for no parameters.

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 executes the current line without entering functions and pauses at the next line. It distinguishes from siblings like 'resume' and 'evaluate_on_call_frame', but includes a confusing alternative message stating 'step_over enters functions', which contradicts the tool's purpose.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use ('skip function internals') and lists alternatives ('resume', 'evaluate_on_call_frame'). Also notes prerequisite of an active paused session. However, the erroneous mention that 'step_over enters functions' could mislead.

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