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

Get channel permissions

get_channel_permissions
Read-only

Retrieve channel permission overwrites and translate them into plain-language permissions for each role and member, clarifying who can access or modify the Discord channel.

Instructions

The permission overwrites on a channel, resolved into plain language per role and member.

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": {
      "channel": "<channel>"
    },
    "name": "get_channel_permissions"
  }
}

Input Schema

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

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

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description does add useful disclosure about the shape of the result — overwrites are resolved per role and member into plain language rather than raw bitfields — but says nothing about pagination, size, or how inheritance is handled.

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?

A single tight sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded, though it would be stronger with an explicit verb leading the phrase.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of conveying what comes back, and it does so only loosely ('resolved into plain language per role and member'). For a read tool this is minimally adequate, but it omits whether inherited/category-level overwrites are included and does not name alternatives.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (guild with its default behaviour, channel) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no channel/guild syntax or resolution rules beyond it, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resource (permission overwrites on a channel) and what it returns (resolved into plain language per role and member), but it is a bare noun phrase with no verb — an agent must infer 'get/retrieve'. It does not distinguish this from close siblings such as get_channel_access, get_member_permissions, or explain_permissions.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent receives no signal about when this read is preferable to explain_permissions or get_channel_access.

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