Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Guildora

Guildora

by az-xx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Add a reaction

add_reaction
Idempotent

Adds a Unicode or custom server emoji reaction to a Discord message. Specify the message and emoji to react, with optional channel, server, or DM targeting.

Instructions

Reacts to a message with a Unicode or custom server emoji.

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": {
      "message": "<message>",
      "emoji": "<emoji>"
    },
    "name": "add_reaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userNoInstead of channel: a user (ID, <@mention> or name) whose DM channel to use.
emojiYesUnicode emoji ("👍") or a server emoji ("<:name:id>", ":name:", name or ID).
guildNoServer ID or name. Optional if DISCORD_GUILD_ID is set or the bot is in one server.
channelNoChannel or thread: ID, <#mention>, link, or name. Archived threads by ID or link.
messageYesMessage ID or message link (https://discord.com/channels/...). With a link, channel is optional.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is a non-destructive write (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and that repeating the call is idempotent. The description adds nothing beyond these annotations: it does not say what permissions the bot needs, whether it can react to messages in inaccessible channels, or what happens on duplicate reactions. For a mutation tool, the added behavioral context is minimal.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The definition is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and free of filler. It is short but appropriate, though it could have spent one more clause on the sibling distinction at no real cost.

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

Completeness3/5

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

This is a simple five-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and helpful annotations, so the definition does not need to explain return values or safety. It is still missing the prerequisites that matter for a reaction call, namely that the target message must exist and be visible to the bot.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already comes with a detailed description: emoji formats, message links, archived threads, and guild fallbacks. The description repeats only the emoji-type idea and adds no new syntax or constraints. A 3 is the correct baseline when the schema does the explanatory work.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description gives a specific verb and resource: it reacts to a message with either a Unicode or a custom server emoji. That is clear enough for an agent to know what the tool does, but the description never distinguishes it from the sibling remove_reaction, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool rather than a plain send_message, or when not to use it. The description also does not mention how add_reaction differs from remove_reaction or pin_message. It gives no usage context beyond the purpose statement.

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