Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Discord MCP - Discord server management MCP for AI agents

Discord MCP - Discord server management MCP for AI agents

by OrygnsCode
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Cancel event

cancel_event
Destructive

Cancel and remove a scheduled Discord event so it no longer appears to members. First call previews the change and returns a confirmation token; repeat with the token to finish.

Instructions

Cancel and remove a scheduled event. Interested members lose the listing. Safe to call directly: the first call changes nothing and returns a preview plus a confirm_token; repeating the call with the token cancels it.

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": {
      "event": "<event>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventYesEvent name or ID.
guildNoGuild (server) name or ID. Omit to use the default guild.
dry_runNo
confirm_tokenNoThe token from this exact action's preview. Where the app can show a confirmation dialog, calling with it asks the user there, and it happens only if they agree.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.4.2
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm_token / description
      Added value: +"The token from this exact action's preview. Where the app can show a confirmation dialog, calling with it asks the user there, and it happens only if they agree."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds real context beyond them: the member-visible effect ('Interested members lose the listing') and a non-obvious safety property that the initial call is a no-op preview. It omits permission/authorization requirements and whether a cancelled event can be recovered or recreated, which keeps 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and effect, then the confirm flow — no filler. The preview explanation is a clause appended after a colon, which is dense but readable; a short clause naming dry_run would round it out.

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 destructive four-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, and the confirmation protocol, which is the critical missing piece elsewhere. The undocumented dry_run parameter and absent permission/error behavior are the remaining gaps.

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 75% and the description reinforces the confirm_token round-trip semantics, but the dry_run parameter has no description in the schema and is never mentioned in the description text, leaving the relationship between dry_run and the preview flow ambiguous. This is the baseline case where the schema does most of the work.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Cancel and remove a scheduled event') and immediately notes the member-visible consequence, which distinguishes it from update_event or get_event in the sibling set. An agent can tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit invocation guidance for the unusual two-step flow: call once for a preview, then repeat with the confirm_token to actually cancel, and calls the first step safe. It does not name when a sibling such as update_event might be the better choice, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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