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

Create server template

create_server_template

Snapshot a Discord server's structure as a template so others can create new servers from it. Define one template per server with a name, optional description, and target guild.

Instructions

Snapshot this server's structure as a Discord template others can create servers from. One template per server.

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_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
guildNoGuild (server) name or ID. Omit to use the default guild.
descriptionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field 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"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write/safe profile is covered. The description adds the one-template-per-server limit, which is genuinely useful behavior, but omits permission requirements (typically Manage Server) and what happens on failure or when a template already exists.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the core action is front-loaded and the constraint follows immediately.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what a successful call yields (a template code/URL others use), which it does not. Combined with the missing permission and parameter detail, it is adequate but leaves real gaps for a mutation tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 33% — only the `guild` parameter is documented in the schema. The description says nothing about `name` or `description` (length limits, whether name must be unique, whether description is optional), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

"Snapshot this server's structure as a Discord template" names a specific verb (snapshot/create) and resource (server template), and the trailing clause explains the downstream effect. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_server_templates or delete_server_template, though it does not name them.

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 only guidance is the constraint "One template per server," which implies a precondition (if one exists, this will fail) but never states when to prefer this over import_server_template, export_server_blueprint, or list_server_templates, nor what prerequisites exist.

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