grant_privilege

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

The description provides no information about side effects, required permissions, or the mutating nature of the operation. While the tool name implies modification, the description does not disclose potential risks or consequences, leaving the agent without awareness of the impact.

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 concise and well-structured, using a single sentence followed by examples. There is no redundant information, and the examples directly illustrate the parameter format, making it easy to parse.

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 that this is a mutating operation with no output schema, the description could be considered complete in terms of not needing to explain returns. However, it lacks any mention of usage context, such as typical use cases, prerequisites, or relationship to other tools, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand its role in a larger workflow.

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 description explains the 'privilege' parameter with examples, adding value beyond the schema's generic description. However, the 'grantee' parameter is not elaborated; the schema's description ('被授权的用户名') is minimal, and the tool description does not clarify what constitutes a valid grantee or any 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 tool's purpose: granting privileges. It provides concrete examples (e.g., 'SELECT ON TABLE t', 'ALL PRIVILEGES ON DATABASE d') that illustrate the expected format, making the intent unambiguous.

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 does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., revoke_privilege). It lacks guidance on scenarios where granting privileges is appropriate, prerequisites, or any conditional context that would help the agent decide when to invoke it.

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