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 member

get_member
Read-only

Retrieve a Discord member's identity, nickname, roles, join date, and timeout state by name or user ID.

Instructions

One member in detail: identity, nickname, roles by name, join date, and timeout state. Accepts a user ID or a name.

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": {
      "user": "<user>"
    },
    "name": "get_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

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

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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, yet the description adds real value by enumerating what comes back (roles resolved to names, join date, timeout state) — information not available anywhere else since there is no output schema. It omits edge-case behavior such as what happens when the name is ambiguous or the member is not found, which keeps it below 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its returned fields, with no redundant phrasing. Every clause carries information an agent can use.

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 usefully stands in for return values, and the two parameters are fully documented in the schema. Missing only failure/ambiguity behavior, which is a modest gap for a read-only lookup tool.

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% and the schema already states "Member name or user ID" for `user`, so "Accepts a user ID or a name" largely restates structured data. The `guild` parameter and its default-guild behavior are not mentioned in the description at all, leaving no added meaning beyond the schema.

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?

"One member in detail" plus an enumeration of returned fields (identity, nickname, roles by name, join date, timeout state) makes clear this is a single-member profile lookup, which is distinguishable from get_member_access/get_member_permissions by what it returns. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 description implies usage (fetch one member's detail by ID or name) and clarifies the input forms, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs when-to-use-another guidance, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer that access/permission questions belong to the sibling tools.

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