discord-server-mcp

create_category

Create a Discord channel category with a name, position, and permission overrides, optionally previewing requests first with a dry run before applying changes.

Instructions

Create a channel category.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bot`	No	Use this bot (name or id) instead of choosing automatically
`name`	Yes
`reason`	No	Reason shown in the server's audit log
`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
`position`	No
`overrides`	No	Permission overrides, e.g. hide it from @everyone

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The only annotation is readOnlyHint=false, which merely confirms this is a mutation; the description carries the full burden and adds nothing. It does not mention required permissions, what happens on name collisions, ordering/position effects, that 'overrides' controls visibility, or that 'reason' is written to an audit log.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is tight with no filler, so nothing needs trimming. But brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined density — no sentence earns extra credit for the information it delivers.

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?

For a mutating tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description is far too thin. An agent gets no picture of permissions required, side effects, or the semantics of overrides and dry_run.

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 71% schema description coverage across 7 parameters, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, and key parameters such as 'name' and 'position' are undocumented in both places. It does not explain the interaction between 'server'/'bot' resolution or the structure of a permission override.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Create a ... category'), which is meaningfully distinct from the sibling create_channel and create_role. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with those siblings or say what a category is in this system.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus create_channel or edit_channel, no prerequisites (bot membership, server selection, permissions), and no note that dry_run exists for previewing the change. The agent must infer all context from the name alone.

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