MCP Discord Bot Server

discord_list_channels

Retrieve all channels in a Discord server by guild ID, including each channel's ID, name, and type for bot or MCP workflows.

Instructions

List all channels in a Discord guild (server).

Returns a list of all channels with their IDs, names, and types.

Args:
    guild_id: The ID of the Discord guild. Use discord_list_guilds to find guild IDs.

Returns:
    JSON array of channel objects.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`guild_id`	Yes	The ID of the Discord guild (server) to list channels for. 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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the shape of the result ('channels with their IDs, names, and types'), but says nothing about permissions/bot membership requirements, pagination, or whether channels of all types are included. For a low-risk read this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Well front-loaded: purpose first, then the helper pointer, then structured Args/Returns blocks. The Returns section partially duplicates the output schema, which is mild redundancy, but nothing is bloated.

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 single-parameter read tool with a full output schema, the description covers what is called, how to get the parameter, and roughly what comes back. The only gap is auth/permission expectations, which is minor given the low complexity.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with a single, well-documented parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by pointing the agent at discord_list_guilds to resolve the guild ID, which is exactly the ambiguity an agent would hit.

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?

The first sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('List all channels in a Discord guild'), which is immediately distinguishable from write siblings like discord_create_text_channel. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with any sibling tool, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description tells the agent how to obtain the required guild_id ('Use discord_list_guilds to find guild IDs'), which is genuinely useful context. However, it offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance or exclusions relative to the other listing tools (discord_list_members, discord_list_guilds), so usage is only implied.

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

Deploy Server