单步执行（跳过函数）

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only (readOnlyHint: false), so the description correctly implies state modification. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond executing a line and skipping functions. No mention of side effects, but expected for debugger stepping.

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 short sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and immediately clarifies the behavior for function calls.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention what happens after execution (e.g., current line moves), but not strictly necessary.

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?

No parameters exist in the schema, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters. It correctly handles the zero-parameter case.

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 verb (执行，execute) and resource (一行代码，one line of code), and distinguishes from siblings by specifying '跳过函数（不进入内部）' (skip function, do not enter inside), which contrasts with gdb_step (step into).

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 implies usage when you want to skip function calls, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like gdb_step or gdb_continue. However, the context of sibling tools and the clear behavior makes it fairly intuitive.

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