Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@ola/buzz-mcp

@ola/buzz-mcp

Official
by ola-krutrim
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

buzz_unreact

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove your reaction from a Buzz message, optionally targeting a specific emoji; omit the emoji to delete all of your reactions on that message.

Instructions

Remove YOUR reaction from a message (kind 5 deletion with one e tag = your reaction's id). Optional emoji removes only that one; otherwise all of yours on the message. Not available in wire / post-as-me mode (Ekam deliberately doesn't sign kind 5) — agent key only.

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": "<channel>",
      "event": "<event>"
    },
    "name": "buzz_unreact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emojiNoonly remove this emoji (default: all of yours on the message)
eventYesthe target message's <id> (from buzz_read)
channelYeschannel name or id
dry_runNopreview only: resolve everything and show the exact event that would be signed (auth tags redacted) — nothing is signed, uploaded or sent

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.36

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the underlying mechanism (a kind 5 deletion referencing the reaction's event id) and an authentication constraint (agent key only, unsupported in wire mode because Ekam does not sign kind 5). That explains *why* the destructiveHint is set rather than just restating it; only the return/confirmation behavior is left implicit.

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 core action and its scope lead the sentence, with the emoji conditional and the mode restriction following in order of relevance. It is dense — parenthetical mechanism plus em-dash caveat in one sentence — but no clause is filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the action, the scope, the conditional parameter behavior, the auth prerequisite, and the environment restriction. An agent can invoke it correctly without opening anything else; only the post-call result shape is unaddressed, which the annotations and schema largely cover.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter including `dry_run` is already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the `emoji` default ('otherwise all of yours on the message'), which matches the schema text but adds no new syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove YOUR reaction from a message') and immediately disambiguates the counterpart of the sibling buzz_react by scoping it to the caller's own reaction. The parenthetical mechanism ('kind 5 deletion with one e tag = your reaction's id') tells an agent exactly what is being produced.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explains the two usage modes clearly: supply `emoji` to remove one reaction, omit it to remove all of yours on the message. It also states an explicit unavailability condition (wire / post-as-me mode, agent key only), which prevents wasted calls. It does not name buzz_react as the inverse operation, but the pairing is obvious from the shared prefix.

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