MCP Discord Bot Server

discord_create_dm

Open a direct message channel with a Discord user by providing their user ID. Returns the DM channel ID for sending messages with other tools.

Instructions

Open a direct message (DM) channel with a Discord user.

Creates or retrieves the DM channel with the specified user.

Args:
    recipient_id: The Discord user ID to open a DM with.

Returns:
    JSON object with the DM channel ID, which can be used with other tools.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`recipient_id`	Yes	The Discord user ID of the recipient. Required.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the important idempotent-style behavior ('Creates or retrieves'). It says nothing about required permissions, whether re-opening an existing DM has side effects, or rate limits, which matters for an unannotated mutation.

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?

Front-loaded summary sentence followed by a useful clarification, then standard Args/Returns blocks. The Args entry is somewhat redundant with the schema but nothing is bloated or buried.

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?

Return values are covered by an output schema, so the description need not explain them, and it correctly points to the channel ID as the handoff value for later tools. Only gap is the absence of permission/caveat detail expected when no annotations are present.

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% for the single parameter, so baseline 3 applies. The Args block restates 'The Discord user ID to open a DM with' without adding format, source, or lookup guidance beyond the schema's own description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Open a direct message (DM) channel') and adds the create-or-retrieve semantics, which distinguishes it from the send-oriented sibling. It never names discord_send_dm explicitly, so the routing is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the 'Returns ... which can be used with other tools' line hints at a two-step workflow (open channel, then send), but there is no explicit when-to-use-this vs discord_send_dm guidance. An agent can infer the intent but must reason about it.

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

Deploy Server