Bulk delete 2–100 Discord messages at once, limited to messages newer than 14 days and requiring Manage Messages permission.
Delete 2-100 messages at once (must be newer than 14 days). Needs Manage Messages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reason | No | Reason shown in the server audit log (optional) | |
| channel_id | Yes | Channel ID (a thread ID also works) | |
| message_ids | Yes | 2-100 message IDs |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the danger is known. The description adds two non-obvious behavioral constraints beyond the annotations: the 14-day message-age limit and the required 'Manage Messages' permission. It omits partial-failure/irreversibility and rate-limit behavior, keeping it from a 5.
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?
A single compact sentence with two parenthetical constraints, front-loaded with the core action. No filler; every clause carries a constraint the agent needs.
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?
For a destructive bulk operation, the critical gotchas (batch size, 14-day window, permission requirement) are all present and the schema is fully annotated. Missing only secondary details like batching beyond 100 or partial-failure semantics, which is minor given the rich schema and annotations.
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 100%, so all three parameters (reason, channel_id, message_ids) are already documented. The description's '2-100' restates the message_ids schema description rather than adding new syntax or constraints. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Delete ... messages') plus a clear scope ('2-100 ... at once'), which implicitly distinguishes it from the single-message sibling discord_delete_message. It stops short of explicitly naming that alternative, so it's a clear purpose without full sibling differentiation.
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?
Provides operating conditions (2-100 batch size, must be newer than 14 days, needs Manage Messages) but never frames when to choose this over discord_delete_message or discord_delete_channel. Usage is implied by 'at once' rather than instructed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.