Skip to main content
Glama
Discord Vencord MCP Bridge

Discord Vencord MCP Bridge

by clawdecode

discord_edit_message

Edit a previously sent Discord message by ID, replacing its content with new text; optionally specify the target channel when it is not the active one.

Instructions

Edit one of your previously sent messages.

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_id": "<message_id>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "discord_edit_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesThe new content for the message.
channel_idNoTarget channel ID (defaults to active).
message_idYesThe ID of the message to edit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
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. It does not say whether content replaces or appends, whether edits are visible to other users, what permissions or failure modes exist (editing someone else's message, stale message IDs), or what the response contains.

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, which suits the size of the operation. However, brevity here shades into under-specification for a write operation rather than earning full marks.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the effect of the edit and any preconditions. As written, an agent knows only the verb and object, not the consequences or failure conditions of calling it.

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 are already documented in the schema, including the channel defaulting behavior. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the baseline 3 case.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('Edit') and resource ('previously sent messages'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like discord_send_message or discord_delete_message, which an agent must infer from names alone.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'one of your previously sent messages' implies an ownership constraint and implies this is the tool for correcting existing messages, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-recreate-or-delete guidance and no mention of alternatives.

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