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

better-discord-mcp

by Sys0xdbg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

discord_edit_thread

Modify a Discord thread: archive, unarchive, lock, unlock, or rename it using the thread ID.

Instructions

Archive/unarchive, lock/unlock, or rename a thread.

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": {
      "threadId": "<threadId>"
    },
    "name": "discord_edit_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
lockedNo
archivedNo
threadIdYes
autoArchiveMinutesNo

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?

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain side effects (e.g., archiving hides thread, locking prevents messages), permissions needed, or whether operations are reversible beyond the 'unarchive/unlock' hints. Minimal transparency.

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?

A single 11-word sentence conveys the core functionality efficiently. Every word is necessary; no filler. Well front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain how each action affects the thread, what permissions are needed, or the meaning of auto-archive. Significant gaps remain.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning by grouping `archived` and `locked` into paired actions and explicating `name` as rename. However, it ignores `autoArchiveMinutes` and doesn't clarify `threadId`'s role. Partially compensates but misses one parameter.

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?

Description clearly states the tool edits threads via three specific actions: archive/unarchive, lock/unlock, and rename. It distinguishes from sibling tools like discord_create_thread and discord_edit_message by focusing on thread modifications. However, it omits the autoArchiveMinutes parameter, slightly reducing completeness.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., manage threads permission) or context for using it over other thread-related tools like discord_create_thread. The description lacks any 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