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

better-discord-mcp

by Sys0xdbg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

discord_edit_guild

Update a Discord server's name, description, or icon using data URIs.

Instructions

Edit guild name/description/icon (iconDataUri is a data URI).

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>"
    },
    "name": "discord_edit_guild"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
reasonNo
guildIdYes
descriptionNo
iconDataUriNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description only notes that it edits and that iconDataUri is a data URI. It does not disclose permissions, side effects, or return behavior, which is insufficient for a write operation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It efficiently states the tool's purpose and a key detail about icon format.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and many siblings, the description lacks essential context like return value, usage notes, or prerequisites. It is too brief for reliable selection.

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?

The description lists three editable fields (name, description, icon), but the schema has five parameters. It does not explain 'reason' or 'guildId' beyond their names. Given 0% schema coverage, this adds some value but is incomplete.

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?

The description clearly states it edits guild name, description, and icon, specifying the resource and actions. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like discord_edit_channel, though the name 'guild' provides natural distinction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as when to use discord_get_guild_info for reading or discord_create_guild for creation. Usage context is implied but not explained.

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