discord_remove_reaction

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action and a default target; it does not mention that remosing another user's reaction likely requires Manage Messages permission, whether the call is idempotent, or what happens if the reaction does not exist. These are important behavioral gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. No filler or repetition. The defaulting behavior is a high-value detail placed immediately after the verb phrase.

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?

This is a side-effect-producing mutation tool with no annotations and no parameter descriptions. Although an output schema exists, the description still leaves out permission semantics, the optional user_id behavior beyond defaulting, and error behavior. It is too sparse to fully support reliable agent invocation.

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 was expected to compensate. It adds meaning only for user_id via the default-bot's-own-reaction note. It does not explain emoji formatting, guild_id purpose, or any relationship between parameters beyond the domain's obvious message identification.

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 says 'Remove a reaction', identifying a specific verb and resource. The additional sentence about defaulting to the bot's own reaction adds useful scope that distinguishes it from the related discord_add_reaction. It does not explicitly mention 'message' but the required channel_id and message_id make the context obvious.

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 offers one piece of guidance: that the bot's own reaction is the default. However, it does not explain when to prefer this over other reaction-related tools, nor when to pass a user_id, nor any permission or context conditions. This is minimal rather than explicit guidance.

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