mcp-discord-bridge

add_multiple_reactions

React to a Discord message with multiple emojis simultaneously by providing channel ID, message ID, and an array of emojis.

Instructions

Add multiple emoji reactions to a message at once

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": {
      "channel_id": "<channel_id>",
      "message_id": "<message_id>",
      "emojis": "<emojis>"
    },
    "name": "add_multiple_reactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`channel_id`	Yes
`message_id`	Yes
`emojis`	Yes	Array of emojis to react with

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description omits behavioral traits like permission requirements, rate limits, or the effect on message reaction count. It only states the intended action without side-effect disclosure.

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?

The description is a single, direct phrase with no redundant words. It earns its place by clearly stating the tool's function without unnecessary elaboration.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and the complexity of batch reactions, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return values, success indicators, or constraints, leaving significant gaps for correct tool invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only emojis have a description). The description adds no details about parameter format, constraints, or how multiple emojis should be provided, relying solely on parameter 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Add' and resource 'multiple emoji reactions to a message', clearly distinguishing from the sibling tool add_reaction by highlighting the batch nature 'at once'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus add_reaction (single reaction) or other alternatives. The agent must infer the batch use case without explicit context.

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