discord-server-mcp

timeout_member

Temporarily restrict a Discord member from talking or reacting by applying a timeout for a set number of minutes; use 0 to end an active timeout.

Instructions

Time a member out (they cannot talk or react) for a while, or end a timeout with minutes 0.

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": {
      "member": "<member>",
      "minutes": "<minutes>"
    },
    "name": "timeout_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bot`	No	Use this bot (name or id) instead of choosing automatically
`member`	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
`minutes`	Yes	0 ends the timeout; max 28 days

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide only readOnlyHint=false, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It usefully discloses the practical effect (cannot talk or react) and the reversal mechanism, but says nothing about required permissions, whether the member is notified, or how role hierarchy affects the call.

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?

A single compact sentence with the primary action front-loaded and the reversal case appended. No filler or redundant framing.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action and reversal but omits permission requirements and failure conditions. Adequate to invoke, but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents bot, reason, server, dry_run and minutes including '0 ends the timeout; max 28 days'. The description's minutes=0 note largely restates the schema, adding no new parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Time a member out') and explains the consequence ('they cannot talk or react'), which makes it readily distinguishable from ban_member and kick_member by its temporary nature. No sibling is named explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The clause 'or end a timeout with minutes 0' gives a concrete usage rule for the removal path, but there is no guidance on when to prefer a timeout over a kick or ban, nor any prerequisite such as required permissions or role hierarchy.

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