Discord MCP Extended

discord_send_voice

Send spoken audio messages to Discord channels by converting text to speech with ElevenLabs TTS. Generates and attaches the voice message.

Instructions

Sends a voice message to a Discord channel using ElevenLabs TTS. Converts text to speech and attaches the audio file.

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": {
      "channelId": "<channelId>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "discord_send_voice"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	The text to convert to speech (max 5000 characters)
`voiceId`	No	Optional ElevenLabs voice ID. Uses default Alex voice if not specified.
`channelId`	Yes	The Discord channel ID to send the voice message to
`includeText`	No	Whether to include the text as a message alongside the audio (default: false)
`replyToMessageId`	No	Optional message ID to reply to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.4Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself. It states the conversion to speech and attachment of audio, but omits details like authentication requirements, rate limits, or failure behavior, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose and explain the mechanism, with no redundant information.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main action but lacks details on response format, prerequisites, or edge cases. It's sufficient for a simple operation but could be more complete.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the tool description doesn't need to add parameter details. It adds marginal value by explaining the text-to-speech process, earning the baseline 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Sends') and identifies the resource ('voice message to a Discord channel') and method ('using ElevenLabs TTS'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling text-sending tools like discord_send.

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 description makes clear the context for use—sending voice messages rather than text—but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, which is a minor gap.

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