Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
better-discord-mcp

better-discord-mcp

by Sys0xdbg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

discord_add_role

Add a role to a Discord member using their user ID, role ID, and guild ID. Requires the 'Manage Roles' permission.

Instructions

Add a role to a member (requires Manage Roles).

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": {
      "guildId": "<guildId>",
      "userId": "<userId>",
      "roleId": "<roleId>"
    },
    "name": "discord_add_role"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNo
roleIdYes
userIdYes
guildIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only mentions 'requires Manage Roles' but does not discuss idempotency, side effects, hierarchy requirements, or return behavior. This is minimally transparent.

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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence and parenthetical permission note. While short, it communicates the core action efficiently, though additional behavioral details could be added without losing conciseness.

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 simple mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits critical context such as that the roleId must belong to an existing role in the guild, that the userId must be a current member, and that the bot must have the necessary role hierarchy. This leaves gaps for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It adds no information about the meaning, format, or constraints of guildId, userId, roleId, or reason, failing to provide any value beyond the schema itself.

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 'Add' and the resources 'role' and 'member', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'discord_remove_role' by explicitly focusing on addition.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'discord_create_role' or 'discord_edit_role'. However, the action of adding an existing role to a member is inherently clear from the name and description, providing implied usage context.

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