discord_add_reaction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only states the basic action and emoji format, omitting important behavioral traits like required permissions, side effects (e.g., duplicate reactions), rate limits, or failure modes. Minimal disclosure.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and critical emoji detail. No wasted words; highly efficient.

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 no output schema and three required parameters, the description is too minimal. It lacks information on return value, constraints (e.g., maximum reactions), error handling, or prerequisites. For a mutation tool, more context is needed to avoid agent mistakes.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description only addresses the 'emoji' parameter by explaining its format. The 'channelId' and 'messageId' parameters are left unexplained, relying on their names. This insufficiently compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Add a reaction' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes the tool from siblings like discord_remove_reaction. It also specifies the emoji format (unicode or custom as name:id), which adds precision.

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 implies the tool is used to add reactions but offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., removing reactions) or any preconditions. It is implied from the action alone.

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