Discord MCP

Criar thread ou post de forum

create_thread

Creates a Discord forum post or starts a thread in a text channel, using a message when messageId is provided or a new public thread otherwise.

Instructions

Em um forum: cria um post (name + content obrigatorios, tags opcionais). Em um canal de texto: com messageId abre uma thread a partir daquela mensagem; sem messageId cria uma thread publica avulsa (content vira a primeira mensagem).

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": {
      "channelId": "<channelId>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_thread"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Nome da thread/post (ate 100 caracteres).
`tags`	No	Tags aplicadas ao post (so forum).
`format`	No	text (padrao) devolve texto compacto; json devolve o objeto bruto.
`content`	No	Primeira mensagem (obrigatoria em forum).
`channelId`	Yes	Forum ou canal de texto (id numerico do Discord).
`messageId`	No	Mensagem de origem (thread a partir de mensagem) (id numerico do Discord).
`autoArchiveMinutes`	No	Arquivar apos inatividade. Padrao 1440 (1 dia).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: content is mandatory in forums, tags are forum-only, and content becomes the first message of a standalone thread. It omits permission/auth requirements and archive behavior (left to the schema).

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the forum case and then the text-channel branch, with zero filler. Every clause carries a behavioral rule the caller needs.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the critical mode-dependent logic is fully covered, and remaining details (format, autoArchiveMinutes defaults) live in the schema. It does not hint at the returned shape, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3), but the description adds conditional semantics the schema cannot express: content is required only in the forum branch, tags apply only to forums, and messageId presence/absence changes the operation. That is real added meaning over the flat parameter list.

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?

States a specific verb (cria) plus resource (thread/post) and splits the behavior by context: forum post vs. text-channel thread. This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like send_message, reply_message and join_thread without needing to open a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit conditional guidance: in a forum it creates a post, in a text channel messageId selects 'thread from message' vs. 'standalone public thread'. It does not name an alternative sibling or state when NOT to use it (e.g., use reply_message for plain replies), so it falls short of a 5.

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