Upvote or downvote a comment. Requires authentication.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| value | Yes | 1 for upvote, -1 for downvote | |
| comment_id | Yes | UUID of the comment to vote on |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency (idempotentHint=true). The description adds only the requirement for authentication, which is standard for mutation tools. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed.
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 two sentences with no unnecessary information, front-loading the core purpose and a key requirement (authentication).
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 simplicity (2 params, output schema exists, annotations cover behavior), the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention the idempotent nature of voting (already in annotations) to reinforce that repeated identical votes do not change state.
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?
Input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions. The description does not add any extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.
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 verb 'Upvote or downvote' and the resource 'a comment', distinguishing it from sibling tools like colony_vote_on_post (vote on post) and colony_react (reactions).
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 notes 'Requires authentication' but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify exclusions or prerequisites beyond authentication.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.