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

Export server blueprint

export_server_blueprint

Snapshot a live server's roles, categories, channels, and visibility into an editable blueprint with permission mappings, IDs for targeted updates, and optional saving to the store.

Instructions

Snapshot a live server's structure into a blueprint: roles, categories, channels, and their visibility, with permission overwrites decompiled back into private_to and read_only where they fit and warnings where they do not. Each item carries its id, so editing the export and planning it with update_existing renames and changes those exact items. Optionally save the result straight to the store with save_as.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "export_server_blueprint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guildNoGuild (server) name or ID. Omit to use the default guild.
save_asNoSave the export under this blueprint name.
include_idsNoDefault true. False for a design meant for other servers.

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 / include_ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Default true. False for a design meant for other servers.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  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?

Beyond the annotations (readOnly false, destructive false), it discloses meaningful behavior: overwrites are decompiled into private_to and read_only where they fit, warnings appear where they do not, and items retain ids so later edits target exact items. It does not clarify side effects of writing via save_as, but the added disclosure is substantial.

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?

Three dense but front-loaded sentences; the core snapshot action leads and the editing/saving paths follow. Some clauses (permission overwrite decompilation) are long, but nothing is redundant filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return content, and it does: exported items with ids and warnings for unrepresentable overwrites. The only gap is the result of save_as (what is returned or stored when saving) which is left implicit.

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 parameters like guild, save_as, and include_ids are already documented. The description reinforces the purpose of save_as and the id-retention rationale, but adds little syntax or meaning beyond what the schema states; baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a precise verb and resource ('Snapshot a live server's structure into a blueprint') and enumerates exactly what is captured: roles, categories, channels, visibility, and permission overwrites. That level of specificity makes it clearly distinct from siblings like get_blueprint or save_blueprint without needing to 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It establishes the working context well: the export is meant to be edited and planned via update_existing, or stored directly with save_as. It does not give explicit exclusions or compare against alternatives such as get_blueprint, so it falls short of a 5.

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