teamspeak3-mcp

cgroup_create

Create a new channel group on a TeamSpeak 3 server by providing a name and optional type (template, regular, or query).

Instructions

Create a new channel group

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "cgroup_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Name for the new channel group
`type`	No	Group type (0=template, 1=regular, 2=query)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.3Sep 13, 2026

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 full behavioral burden. It states the mutation ('create') but omits permissions required, side effects, reversibility, or what happens on failure. Minimal disclosure for a write operation.

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 no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the core action, though it could be slightly more informative without loss of conciseness.

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?

With two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should convey more context about creation behavior and return expectations. The single sentence leaves significant gaps for a mutation 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 the schema already documents both parameters including the enum-like type meanings. The description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: 'Create a new channel group'. It is clear what the tool does and is distinguishable from most siblings by resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from related group tools like sgroup_create or channel_create.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sgroup_create or channel_create. The description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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