discord-mcp

Delete channel

delete_channel

Permanently delete a Discord channel with a single command. This irreversible action removes the channel and all its content.

Instructions

Permanently delete a channel. This cannot be undone.

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": {
      "channel": "<channel>"
    },
    "name": "delete_channel"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`reason`	No	Reason recorded in the audit log.
`server`	No	Server (guild) name or id. Optional when the bot is in a single server or DISCORD_GUILD_ID is set.
`channel`	Yes	Channel to delete (name or id).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses that deletion is permanent and irreversible, which is a key behavioral trait. However, since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden; it could mention permission requirements or cascading effects.

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 that are front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words.

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?

For a simple destructive action, the description is adequate but lacks context about return values, permissions, or prerequisites (e.g., needing manage_channels permission). With no output schema, a bit more detail would be beneficial.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not excel.

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 clearly states the verb 'delete' and the resource 'channel', and adds 'permanently' and 'cannot be undone' to reinforce finality. This distinguishes it from sibling operations like archive_thread or edit_channel.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., archive_thread or edit_channel). The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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