discord_list_bansRetrieve a Discord guild's ban list with pagination controls to review moderated users. Requires Ban Members permission and supports before/after cursors plus limit.
List guild bans with pagination. Requires the Ban Members permission.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| before | No | ||
| guildId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| error | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds two useful behavioral details beyond that: the permission requirement and the fact that results are paginated. It stops short of describing pagination semantics, rate limits, or error behavior, which keeps it at an adequate rather than rich level.
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?
Two compact sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded and the prerequisite follows immediately.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, permission, and the existence of pagination, but with 0% schema description coverage it leaves the cursor parameters under-specified. For a paginated list tool this is workable but not fully complete.
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 0%, so the description must compensate for four undocumented parameters. It only says 'with pagination', which hints that before/after/limit are cursor-related but does not explain that they are snowflake IDs, how the cursors interact, or what the limit bounds mean. guildId is implied by 'guild bans' but not explained either.
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 and resource ('List guild bans') that is unambiguously distinct from mutation siblings like discord_ban_member and discord_unban_member. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the intent is clear without opening the schema.
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?
The description supplies a concrete prerequisite ('Requires the Ban Members permission'), which is useful usage context. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over related ones such as discord_get_guild or member search, and no exclusions or failure conditions are described.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
This server cannot be deployed