mcp-discord-bridge

delete_role

Delete a role from a Discord server by providing the guild ID and role ID, along with an optional reason for the audit log.

Instructions

Delete a role from the 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": {
      "guild_id": "<guild_id>",
      "role_id": "<role_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_role"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`guild_id`	Yes
`role_id`	Yes
`reason`	No	Audit log reason (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are absent, so description bears full burden. It implies destructive action but does not disclose permanence, side effects (e.g., cascading on members/permissions), or restrictions (e.g., cannot delete system roles). No mention of authorization or rate limits.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks additional structural elements like bullet points; the brevity sacrifices completeness.

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?

Given the tool is destructive, has 3 parameters, and no output schema, the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain return values, side effects, or any contextual information beyond the basic action.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 33% (only reason has a description). Description does not add meaning to guild_id, role_id, or reason beyond the schema. For a tool with low coverage, description should compensate but fails to do so.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete a role from the server', specifying verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_role, edit_role, assign_role, etc.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like remove_role or edit_role. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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