Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
better-discord-mcp

better-discord-mcp

by Sys0xdbg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

discord_remove_reaction

Remove your own reaction from a specific Discord message by providing the channel ID, message ID, and emoji.

Instructions

Remove your reaction from a message.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "channelId": "<channelId>",
      "messageId": "<messageId>",
      "emoji": "<emoji>"
    },
    "name": "discord_remove_reaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emojiYes
channelIdYes
messageIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states action, does not disclose key behaviors such as that the reaction must be the user's own, or failure modes if reaction doesn't exist, or rate limits. Minimal transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description is too minimal for an agent to reliably select and invoke the tool, especially when compared to richer sibling definitions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and description adds no meaning to parameters (emoji, channelId, messageId). Agent has no guidance on format or constraints beyond field names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'remove your reaction' - a specific verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like discord_remove_all_reactions (removes all reactions) and discord_remove_user_reaction (removes another user's reaction) by specifying 'your'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like discord_remove_user_reaction or discord_remove_all_reactions. Also no prerequisites or conditions (e.g., must have added the reaction first) are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools