Mute a Discord member or disable their communication for a specified duration, up to 28 days, with an optional audit reason.
Place a member in timeout (mute/communication disabled) for up to 28 days (2419200 seconds)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reason | No | Audit log reason | |
| userId | Yes | Member User ID | |
| guildId | No | Discord server ID (defaults to DISCORD_GUILD_ID) | |
| durationSeconds | Yes | Duration in seconds (1 to 2419200 = 28 days) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the meaningful effect (mute/communication disabled) and the 28-day ceiling. It omits permission requirements, what happens to an existing timeout, and reversibility (remove_timeout exists but is not mentioned).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and the key constraint, with zero filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the effect and duration cap but leaves permission prerequisites, conflict with existing timeouts, and the inverse remove_timeout operation unaddressed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented, including the 1–2419200 bounds on durationSeconds. The description's restatement of the 28-day limit adds no information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('Place in timeout') and resource ('member'), plus clarifies the effect as mute/communication disabled. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling remove_timeout, so an agent must infer the inverse relationship from the name.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites such as required permissions or whether the target must be a non-admin. The agent only gets the implied intent from the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.