discord-server-mcp

enable_tools

Read-only

Activate extra Discord tool packs on demand so tasks can use moderation, messaging, automation, or API features beyond the core tools.

Instructions

Turn on more Discord tools for this conversation. Only the core tools are on at first; call this as soon as a task needs one of these packs: automations (role menus, welcome messages with auto-roles, support tickets and their history, the server's own slash commands, staff slash commands (/ban, /lock, /purge…), moderation logs and searching them, staff alerts, support forums, rules (when X happens do Y), member verification, scheduled messages); live (what is happening now, waiting for a reply, mention or join); jobs (background jobs: message backups and restores, roles for many members at once); moderation (AutoMod, locking channels, purging messages, bans list, pruning, audit log, role audit, member export); messaging (webhooks (post with another name), DMs, pins list, announcements publishing, polls and reactions results); organizing (cloning channels, more forum tags, threads, following announcement channels, copying and syncing permissions); server_settings (onboarding, welcome screen, invites list, server stats and activity, bot profile, creating or leaving servers); expressions (emojis, stickers, soundboard, scheduled events, stage, application commands); api (direct Discord API calls for anything else).

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": {
      "packs": "<packs>"
    },
    "name": "enable_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`packs`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety bar is lower and the description is consistent with them (enabling tool packs is not data destruction). However, it discloses nothing about effect: whether enabled tools appear immediately in the toolset, whether the enabling persists for the conversation, or what confirmation is returned. For an activation tool those facts are the behavioral core.

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?

Purpose and trigger are correctly front-loaded in the first two clauses. But the pack inventory is delivered as a single run-on sentence with deeply nested parentheses, which makes scanning for one pack slow; a bulleted mapping would have preserved the content at much lower cognitive cost.

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 one-parameter activation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the decisive content (what each pack unlocks and when to call). The remaining gap is post-call expectations — whether the newly enabled tools become callable in the same turn and how activation is confirmed.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning — and it does, glossing every pack value (automations, live, jobs, moderation, messaging, organizing, server_settings, expressions, api) with concrete contents, which is the exact information needed to pick packs. It omits the 'all' enum value present in the schema, and gives no guidance on combining packs or on array ordering.

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+resource ('Turn on more Discord tools for this conversation') and immediately scopes it to a meta/activation role that no sibling tool performs. An agent can tell this is the enablement gate, not a Discord action like ban_member or create_channel.

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?

Explicit trigger is given: 'Only the core tools are on at first; call this as soon as a task needs one of these packs', and the pack-by-pack contents let an agent map a task to the right pack. It does not say when NOT to call it (e.g., re-enabling an already-enabled pack) or what to do if a needed capability falls into no pack, so it falls short of a full 5.

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