mcp-discord-bridge

send_dm

Send a direct message to a specified user by providing their user ID and message content.

Instructions

Send a direct message to a user

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>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "send_dm"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user_id`	Yes
`content`	Yes	Message content (max 2000 chars)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention idempotency, permissions needed, rate limits, or side effects. The only behavioral hint is the 'max 2000 chars' note in the schema for the content parameter, but the description itself adds nothing.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loading the core purpose. Every word is necessary; there is no fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and a brief description, the tool is poorly documented. It fails to explain success/failure, differentiate from 'send_message', or cover usage contexts.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage (only 'content' has a description), the overall description does not elaborate on parameters. The 'user_id' parameter lacks any explanation, and the description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Send a direct message') and the target ('to a user'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'send_message' or 'send_webhook_message', leaving ambiguity about when a 'direct message' is used.

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., 'send_message' for channels). The description lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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