Skip to main content
Glama
PaSympa

discord-mcp

by PaSympa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

discord_get_membership_screening

Read-only

Fetch a Discord server's membership screening form, including the rules and questions new members must accept before gaining access. Returns the form as JSON with its version.

Instructions

Fetch the server's membership screening form, the rules/questions new members must accept before gaining access. Requires the server to have the Community feature enabled. Read-only. Returns the form as JSON, including its version.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guild_idYesDiscord server (guild) ID (snowflake).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
versionYes
descriptionYes
form_fieldsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.2.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / guild_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d{17,20}$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "description": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "form_fields": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "description": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          },
+          "field_type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "required": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "values": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "field_type",
+          "label",
+          "values",
+          "required",
+          "description"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "version": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "version",
+    "form_fields",
+    "description"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / guild_id / description
      Added value: +"Discord server (guild) ID (snowflake)."
  4. Addedv1.5.0
  5. Removedv1.0.0
  6. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the Community feature requirement, that the result is returned as JSON, and that the response includes the form's version. There is no contradiction with annotations, and no hidden side effects are implied.

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?

The description is three concise sentences that front-load the action and resource, then provide the prerequisite and return format. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it identifies what is fetched, the precondition, and the response format. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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%; the only parameter, guild_id, is already well described as a Discord server ID snowflake with a validation pattern. The description does not need to add parameter-specific meaning, and the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: it fetches the server's membership screening form, and explains what that form is (rules/questions new members must accept). This distinguishes it from the sibling discord_update_membership_screening and from other get-style tools.

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?

The description gives a clear prerequisite: the server must have the Community feature enabled. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the read-only fetch wording and the sibling update tool make the intended use reasonably clear.

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