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

Update welcome screen

update_welcome_screen

Edit a Discord Community welcome screen by updating its description and up to five channel cards, so new members can find key channels.

Instructions

Edit the Community welcome screen: the description and up to five channel cards.

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": "update_welcome_screen"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guildNoGuild (server) name or ID. Omit to use the default guild.
enabledNo
channelsNo
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. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • removedInput schema / properties / channels / items / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation, so the safety profile is covered. Beyond that the description adds only the 'up to five' cap; it says nothing about whether omitted fields (`enabled`, `description`, `channels`) are preserved or cleared, which is the single most consequential behavior for an all-optional-parameter update tool. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the editable scope appears immediately after the verb. It is lean to the point of under-specification, but there is no wasted wording.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation with four optional parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is too thin: it omits the `enabled` toggle entirely and leaves partial-vs-full-replace semantics, permission requirements, and response behavior undocumented. An agent could invoke it but could easily wipe fields it did not intend to touch.

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 description coverage is 25% (only `guild` is documented), so the description must compensate and only partially does: 'up to five channel cards' usefully restates the maxItems=5 cap, but the `enabled` parameter is never mentioned anywhere, and the 50/140 character limits and the channel-card structure (`channel` + `description`) get no explanation. The mapping of 'description' in prose to which schema field is also slightly ambiguous.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Edit the Community welcome screen') and scopes the editable surface to the description and up to five channel cards, which lets an agent distinguish it from the read-only sibling get_welcome_screen. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling or contrast, but the mutating intent is unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to reach for this tool versus get_welcome_screen or other server-configuration tools, and no preconditions such as required permissions or whether the guild must have the welcome screen feature enabled. The agent is left to infer usage entirely.

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