discord-server-mcp

apply_blueprint

Build or complete a Discord server from a template, exported file, or custom layout. Preview changes in plan mode, then apply to create only missing roles and channels without deleting anything.

Instructions

Build or complete a server from a blueprint: a built-in template (list_templates), a saved export (file), or a layout you write (blueprint: {roles, categories:[{name, overrides, channels:[{name, type, topic, slowmode, tags, overrides}]}], channels}). mode "plan" lists the steps without changing anything; "apply" does them. Only what is missing is created, matching names loosely (emojis and dashes ignored), so it is safe to run again to continue. Nothing is deleted.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "apply_blueprint"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bot`	No	Use this bot (name or id) instead of choosing automatically
`file`	No	Path of a blueprint JSON (e.g. from export_server_structure)
`mode`	No		plan
`server`	No	Server name or id. Optional when the bot is in one server or DISCORD_GUILD_ID is set.
`dry_run`	No	Show the requests that would be made without changing anything
`template`	No
`blueprint`	No
`background`	No	Apply as a background job (for big layouts); follow it with job_status
`update_existing`	No	Also move existing channels into the blueprint's categories, update roles that differ and reorder
`copy_from_server`	No	Copy the structure of another server a configured bot is in
`discord_template`	No	A Discord server template link (discord.new/… or discord.com/template/…) or its code, e.g. from a template website

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, while the description adds significant behavior: only missing items are created, names match loosely, re-runs are safe, and nothing is deleted. It omits permission requirements and error behavior, but adds substantial context beyond annotations.

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?

Front-loaded and efficient overall, with the key source options and safety behavior stated early. The inline blueprint shape is useful but dense, and the description could be slightly better structured.

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 an 11-parameter mutation tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the core workflow, idempotency, plan mode, and deletion safety well. Some operational details such as permissions and result formatting are left implicit, but the schema covers most input semantics.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is moderate at 73%, and the description clarifies mode and the nested blueprint shape. It does not explain the other parameters such as bot, server, dry_run, background, update_existing, copy_from_server, or discord_template, leaving those to the schema.

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, 'Build or complete a server,' and names the three blueprint sources plus the expected layout shape. This clearly distinguishes it from single-resource creation siblings and makes the tool's scope obvious.

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?

Explains mode 'plan' versus 'apply' and names list_templates for built-in templates, plus notes idempotent re-runs. It does not mention preview_blueprint as an alternative, so sibling routing is not fully explicit.

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