discord_remove_reaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose permissions needed (e.g., whether it can remove any user's reaction or only the bot's), rate limits, error conditions, or what happens on success, which is insufficient 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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with zero waste—it states the core action and target without fluff. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loaded with essential information, making it 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 the tool has 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on permissions, parameter usage, error handling, and return values, which are critical for a mutation tool in a collaborative platform like Discord.

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%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'emoji' format to use (e.g., Unicode vs. custom emoji IDs), what 'userId' is for (optional to remove a specific user's reaction), or how to obtain channel/message IDs, leaving parameters poorly documented.

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 the action ('removes') and the target ('a specific emoji reaction from a Discord message'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'discord_delete_message' or explain what distinguishes removing a reaction from deleting a message entirely, which prevents a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing message access), exclusions (e.g., cannot remove others' reactions without permissions), or related tools like 'discord_add_reaction' for context, leaving usage unclear.

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