I mean it does everything a printf() can do - except just better.
Because that's too fruity, real men (tm) don't use debuggers /s
Programmers are so funny, they'll present themselves as rational and logical, but then follow the advice of some old geezer who thinks syntax highlighting is for pussies rather than admitting that their tools suck and need to be better.
I have a particular chip on my shoulder about this whole printf debugging thing: https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1465200027672866816
Some programs simply have too much state, too complex of structures (for performance or memory reasons), or very long runtimes to reasonably debug purely with prints.
I find that when I use a debugger I fall into the trap of mindless looking at variables, stopping to inspect data (sometimes changing a variable), drilling down into struct members... (That is your exact list except I've never used a debugger that can graph dx/dy though I'm sure that applies too) All the while forgetting that the real goal is to figure out why the program is in the bad state i the first place.
If you can avoid that trap all those tools of debuggers are useful. I sometimes do use a debugger for each of the above things, but I make it a point to limit the time I spend in the debugger.
If debuggers were reliable, I’d take them over printf-debugging any day. But to this day I’ve never seen one that is.