pg_revoke_privileges

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention idempotency, error handling (e.g., behavior if the role or database does not exist), whether it revokes only specified privileges or all, or any cascading effects. The description is too sparse for a mutation operation.

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 with no padding. However, it is under-specified for a complex tool with four parameters. Conciseness is good, but the content could be expanded without sacrificing clarity.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on valid privilege values, the effect of grantOptionFor, error conditions, and required permissions. The tool's behavior is inadequately specified for an AI agent to use correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should clarify parameter meanings. It does not explain what values are valid for 'privileges' (e.g., ALL, SELECT, INSERT) or the purpose of the optional 'grantOptionFor' parameter. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema's type constraints.

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 'Revoke database-level PostgreSQL privileges from a role', specifying the verb (revoke), resource (database-level privileges), and target (role). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like pg_revoke_role (which revokes role membership) and pg_grant_privileges (which grants privileges).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pg_revoke_role or pg_grant_privileges. There is no mention of prerequisites, context for when revoking is appropriate, or when the optional grantOptionFor parameter should be used.

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