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

better-discord-mcp

by Sys0xdbg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

discord_execute_webhook

Post messages to Discord channels using webhooks. Provide webhook ID and token, with optional content, embeds, username, or avatar.

Instructions

Post a message via a webhook (needs webhook token).

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": {
      "webhookId": "<webhookId>",
      "token": "<token>"
    },
    "name": "discord_execute_webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYes
embedsNo
contentNo
usernameNo
avatarUrlNo
webhookIdYes

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 are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the prerequisite but does not disclose rate limits, idempotency, error handling, or side effects. The tool is clearly a write operation, but lacks behavioral depth.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It front-loads the core action but omits necessary details. It could be expanded without becoming verbose.

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 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how to obtain a webhook token, the role of each parameter, or what the response looks like. This makes the tool harder to use correctly.

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%, and the description only mentions the token requirement. The other 5 parameters (webhookId, embeds, content, username, avatarUrl) are not explained, leaving the agent with no semantic understanding beyond the schema structure.

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 'Post a message via a webhook', specifying the action (post), resource (webhook), and a prerequisite (needs webhook token). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like discord_send_message which sends messages via bot.

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 mentions the need for a webhook token but provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., discord_send_message, discord_send_embed). Usage context is implied but exclusions or conditional advice are absent.

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