discord-mcp

roles_create

Create a new role in a Discord guild by specifying name, color, permissions, and optional settings. Use it for programmatic role provisioning, such as tier-based or integration roles.

Instructions

Purpose: Create a new role in a guild.

When to use:

Programmatic role provisioning (e.g. tier-based roles, integration roles).

permissions is a base-10 STRING (Discord permission integer; bitfields exceed JS number safety).

Returns: {id, name, color, position, permissions, mentionable, hoist}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`icon`	No	Role icon (data URI; requires guild boost level)
`name`	No	Role name (default "new role")
`color`	No	RGB color integer
`hoist`	No	Display members with this role separately in the sidebar
`guild_id`	Yes	Target guild
`mentionable`	No	Whether @-mentioning the role notifies members
`permissions`	No	Permission bitfield as base-10 string
`audit_reason`	No	Reason recorded in audit log (X-Audit-Log-Reason header)
`unicode_emoji`	No	Role unicode emoji (requires ROLE_ICONS feature)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.28.0Sep 15, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / icon / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / icon / type

Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

removedInput schema / properties / unicode_emoji / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / unicode_emoji / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

First observedv0.22.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey the read/write/destructive profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds the permissions string rationale and return fields, but does not disclose operational traits such as required permissions, role hierarchy placement, or failure conditions. It adds some value without contradicting annotations.

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?

The description is compact, well-organized with bolded labels, and front-loads the primary purpose. Every sentence carries useful information without filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 9-parameter create operation, the description provides a clear purpose, use case, return shape, and a critical type caveat. The schema covers all parameters and annotations cover safety, so only marginal operational details like permission prerequisites and role placement are absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description meaningfully adds to the permissions parameter by explaining why it must be a base-10 string ('bitfields exceed JS number safety'), which is important for correct invocation.

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 opens with 'Create a new role in a guild', a specific verb and resource. It unambiguously distinguishes this from sibling role tools like roles_modify, roles_delete, and roles_list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'When to use' section explicitly states a use case: programmatic role provisioning such as tier-based or integration roles. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear for an agent deciding when to invoke this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server