discord-admin-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_role

Creates a new Discord role in a guild, allowing configuration of name, color, permissions, hoist, and mentionable settings.

Instructions

Cria um cargo.

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>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_role"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	Yes
`color`	No
`hoist`	No
`reason`	No
`guild_id`	Yes
`mentionable`	No
`permissions`	No	0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

D1.3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers none of it. It does not state that this is a mutating operation, that it requires guild permissions, that the `reason` parameter feeds the audit log, or what happens on failure or with default values.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is not verbose, but it is under-specified rather than concise. There is no structure or front-loading of useful information because there is essentially no content.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutating tool with zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this description is completely inadequate. An agent could not reliably invoke it, especially regarding the encoded `permissions` field and the audit-log `reason`.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across 7 parameters, and the description adds no meaning for any of them. Fields like `permissions` (a string-encoded bitfield defaulting to "0"), `hoist`, `mentionable`, and `reason` are entirely undocumented and highly non-obvious to an agent.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Cria um cargo" restates the tool name (create_role) with no additional specificity. It does not distinguish the tool from siblings such as edit_role, delete_role, add_role, or list_roles, so an agent learns nothing beyond what the name already implies.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing Manage Roles permission), and no routing to alternatives like edit_role for modifying an existing role. The agent must infer everything from the name.

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