revoke_postgresql_privileges

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely says 'revoke access' and does not mention whether the user must exist, if all privileges are revoked, if the operation is destructive, or any prerequisites. This lack of context leaves the agent to guess at side effects.

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, short sentence that front-loads the verb 'Revoke' and clearly states the object. It contains zero fluff or redundant phrasing.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description is minimally adequate but leaves notable gaps: no usage guidance, no behavioral transparency, and no explanation of return values or error behavior. The absence of annotations and output schema makes the one-sentence description under-specified for an agent choosing among many sibling tools.

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 already fully describes both parameters ('PostgreSQL username' and 'Database name'). The description adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Revoke') and names the resource ('PostgreSQL user's access to a database'), making it unmistakable what the tool does. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like set_postgresql_privileges (granting) and revoke_mysql_privileges (different database system).

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 such as set_postgresql_privileges or revoke_mysql_privileges. It only states the action without any context about when it applies or when to choose another tool.

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