mcp-discord-bridge

set_nickname

Change or remove a member's nickname on a Discord server. Provide guild, user, and new nickname or leave empty to reset.

Instructions

Set or reset a member's nickname

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>",
      "user_id": "<user_id>"
    },
    "name": "set_nickname"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`guild_id`	Yes
`user_id`	Yes
`nickname`	No	New nickname (empty or null to reset)
`reason`	No	Audit log reason (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral weight. It only states the action but omits necessary details like permission requirements, reversibility, rate limits, or side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It is highly concise for the information it conveys.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain return values, error states, or edge cases like resetting the nickname. The tool's behavior is underspecified.

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 description coverage is 50% (nickname and reason have descriptions, guild_id and user_id do not). The description adds no parameter-level explanation beyond what the schema already provides. It fails to compensate for the missing field descriptions.

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 (set or reset) and the target (member's nickname). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like assign_role or kick_member. However, 'set or reset' is slightly redundant.

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, such as how to update other member attributes or when to avoid using it. The description lacks context for appropriate use.

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