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

List events

list_events
Read-only

Lists scheduled Discord community events members can RSVP to, with type, time, status, and interest counts; specify a guild or use the default.

Instructions

Scheduled community events (the kind members RSVP to), with type, time, status, and interest counts. For pending scheduled messages see list_scheduled_messages; for live event subscriptions see list_event_subscriptions.

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": "list_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered; the description adds genuine value on top by defining the scope of what is returned (scheduled RSVP-style events, not messages or subscriptions) and enumerating the returned attributes. It says nothing about volume, ordering, or pagination behavior, which is the remaining behavioral gap.

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 compact sentences with zero filler: the first front-loads what the tool returns, the second handles disambiguation. Every clause earns its place and no sentence restates the name or title.

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 one-optional-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource definition, the returned fields, and the nearest confusable siblings. Mentioning expected result volume or whether results are scoped to the caller would close the last gap.

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?

There is only one optional parameter (guild) and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself explaining 'Omit to use the default guild.' The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the schema-heavy baseline of 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 names the precise resource — scheduled community events that members RSVP to — and distinguishes it in the same breath from pending scheduled messages and live event subscriptions. The parenthetical and the field list (type, time, status, interest counts) let an agent tell it apart from the sibling list tools without opening any 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 explicitly routes the agent away from this tool for two adjacent cases ('For pending scheduled messages see list_scheduled_messages; for live event subscriptions see list_event_subscriptions'), which is strong exclusion guidance. What's missing is a positive 'use this when' statement or any note about how it relates to other event-reading siblings, so it stops just short of full when/when-not coverage.

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