Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Discord Vencord MCP Bridge

Discord Vencord MCP Bridge

by clawdecode
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

discord_ban_member

Ban a user from a Discord server by user ID, with optional server targeting and deletion of recent message history.

Instructions

Ban a user from a server.

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": {
      "user_id": "<user_id>"
    },
    "name": "discord_ban_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_idYesUser ID to ban.
guild_idNoServer ID (defaults to active server).
delete_message_secondsNoNumber of seconds of message history to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

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 the full behavioral burden and fails to state that this is a destructive, permission-gated write operation, whether it is reversible, or that delete_message_seconds irreversibly purges history. 'Ban' implies mutation, but nothing beyond that is disclosed.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and the verb first. It is efficient but borders on under-specification rather than being genuinely well-structured.

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?

For a destructive, permission-gated moderation action with no annotations and no output schema, the description should disclose permission requirements, irreversibility, and what happens on success/failure. None of that is present, leaving an agent unable to predict side effects.

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 all three parameters (user_id, guild_id, delete_message_seconds) are already documented in the schema, including the default active-server behavior. The description adds no syntax, range, or consequence detail beyond that baseline.

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 ('Ban') and resource ('a user from a server'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as discord_kick_member or discord_unban_member, which an agent must infer from the name alone.

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 guidance on when to use this instead of discord_kick_member (removal vs. permanent block) or discord_unban_member, and no stated preconditions such as needing ban permissions or a valid guild context. The agent must derive usage from the tool name.

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