reactions_remove

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states the action (remove) but omits details about idempotency, error behavior (e.g., reaction not found), authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects.

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 only 5 words, which is overly terse. While concise, it sacrifices essential information. It lacks structure and does not earn its place by providing enough context.

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 5 parameters (1 required), no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is highly incomplete. It does not equip the agent to correctly identify the item or understand the reaction removal process, even though an output schema exists.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The description itself does not explain any parameters. The agent cannot understand what 'name' represents (presumably the reaction emoji) or how to identify the target item using channel, file, file_comment, and timestamp.

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 'Remove a reaction from an item' clearly states the verb (remove), resource (reaction), and target (item). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like reactions_add, reactions_get, and reactions_list, which perform different operations.

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 does not specify prerequisites, when to use it vs. other reaction tools, or any context about appropriate use cases.

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