TeamSpeak MCP

create_server_group

Create a new TeamSpeak server group by providing a name and optional group type (template, regular, or query). Use this tool to define user groups for permission management.

Instructions

Create a new server group with specified name and type

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_server_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Name for the new server group
`type`	No	Group type (0=template, 1=regular, 2=query, default: 1)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 15, 2025

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but tells only that it creates a new server group. It does not disclose required permissions, whether the operation is idempotent, or any side effects (e.g., name uniqueness or validation constraints).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and inputs.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple creation tool, the description covers the basic action and inputs but omits details about the return value (e.g., ID of new server group) and potential error conditions (e.g., duplicate name).

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 baseline is 3. The description restates 'name and type' without adding new meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description clearly states the action 'create a new server group' and specifies the inputs 'name and type'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_server_groups or manage_server_group_permissions which have different purposes.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for listing or managing permissions). There is no mention of prerequisites or context that would help an agent decide to invoke this tool.

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