set_postgresql_privileges

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the action without detailing side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or whether existing privileges are replaced or augmented. The nature of 'Grant' implies a write operation, but no additional behavioral context is offered.

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 a single, concise sentence that communicates the core purpose without any fluff or repetition. It is perfectly sized for the simple nature of the tool.

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?

The tool is simple with two well-documented parameters, but the description lacks essential context such as what specific privileges are granted, whether it is idempotent, and any prerequisites. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally adequate but leaves room for ambiguity about the exact behavior.

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 provides full descriptions for both parameters, and the description mentions 'user' and 'database' in a natural context. However, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 action ('Grant') and the resource ('a PostgreSQL user access to a database'), which distinguishes it from the sibling 'revoke_postgresql_privileges'. However, it does not specify what type of privileges are granted (e.g., all privileges, specific permissions), leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_mysql_privileges' or 'revoke_postgresql_privileges'. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., user/database existence) or any condition under which this tool should be selected, offering no usage context.

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