bof_elevation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the tool performs privilege escalation and UAC bypass, which are potentially destructive actions, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., system instability, detection risk) or prerequisites (e.g., admin rights, specific OS versions).

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 somewhat lengthy but well-structured with a one-line summary followed by a bullet list of subcommands and examples. It could be slightly more concise without losing essential information.

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 complexity (multiple subcommands), the description covers each with explanations and examples. An output schema exists, so return values are handled. However, it lacks behavioral context like potential side effects or permission requirements.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains the 'command' and 'args' parameters with examples for each subcommand, effectively compensating for the missing schema descriptions and clarifying parameter usage.

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 opening line 'Elevation-BOF: Local privilege escalation to SYSTEM' clearly states the tool's purpose (escalation to SYSTEM) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like bof_ad or bof_execution which target different domains.

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 lists specific subcommands with examples but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it (e.g., if already SYSTEM or lacking privileges). The examples provide some implicit guidance, but no clear usage boundaries.

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