Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Guildora

Guildora

by az-xx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Pin or unpin a message

pin_message
Idempotent

Pin or unpin a Discord message in a channel, thread, or DM to keep important information visible; use pinned=false to remove a pin.

Instructions

Pins a message (pinned: true, default) or unpins it (pinned: false). Max 50 pins per channel.

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": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "pin_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userNoInstead of channel: a user (ID, <@mention> or name) whose DM channel to use.
guildNoServer ID or name. Optional if DISCORD_GUILD_ID is set or the bot is in one server.
pinnedNotrue to pin (default), false to unpin.
channelNoChannel or thread: ID, <#mention>, link, or name. Archived threads by ID or link.
messageYesMessage ID or message link (https://discord.com/channels/...). With a link, channel is optional.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description contributes one genuinely new behavioral fact — the 50-pin-per-channel limit — but omits what happens when that limit is hit, what permissions are required (e.g. manage-messages), and whether unpinning a non-pinned message errors.

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?

Two short sentences with the mode-switch explained first and the capacity constraint second. Nothing is wasted and the key information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has five optional/required routing parameters (guild, channel, user, message), no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile. The description covers purpose and the pin cap but says nothing about permission requirements or failure behavior at the limit, which matters for a state-mutating tool.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, and the description only restates the pinned flag semantics and its default. It adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (pin/unpin a message) and explains the boolean toggle that selects the mode, including which value is the default. The action is unambiguous and distinct from the messaging siblings, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with tools like delete_message or edit_message.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternatives; the only contextual information is the operational ceiling 'Max 50 pins per channel.' An agent must infer that this is the tool for pin management purely from the verb.

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