Skip to main content
Glama
wowjinxy
by wowjinxy

list_bans

Retrieve a list of banned users from a Discord server to review moderation actions and manage community access.

Instructions

List banned users for the server.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
server_idNo
limitNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that implements the 'list_bans' tool. Fetches banned users using guild.bans() iterator (limited), formats their names, IDs, and ban reasons into a markdown list.
    async def list_bans(
        server_id: str | int | None = None,
        limit: int = 20,
        ctx: Context = None,
    ) -> str:  # type: ignore[override]
        """List banned users for the server."""
    
        assert ctx is not None
        bot, config = await _acquire(ctx)
        guild_id = _resolve_guild_id(config, server_id)
        guild = await _ensure_guild(bot, guild_id)
    
        limit = max(1, min(limit, 100))
        entries: list[discord.guild.BanEntry] = []
        try:
            async for entry in guild.bans(limit=None):
                entries.append(entry)
                if len(entries) >= limit:
                    break
        except discord.DiscordException as exc:
            raise _describe_discord_error("list bans", exc) from exc
    
        if not entries:
            return f"No banned users found for {guild.name}."
    
        lines = [f"**Banned users for {guild.name} (showing {len(entries)}):**"]
        for entry in entries:
            user = entry.user
            reason_text = entry.reason or "No reason provided"
            lines.append(f"• {user.display_name} ({user.id}) – Reason: {reason_text}")
    
        return "\n".join(lines)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List') but doesn't describe key behaviors: whether it's read-only (implied but not explicit), what the output format is (though output schema exists), pagination details (limit parameter hints at it), or authentication requirements. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, it lacks behavioral context and parameter guidance, making it incomplete for optimal agent use.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description doesn't mention any parameters, failing to compensate for the coverage gap. However, with only 2 parameters (server_id and limit) and an output schema present, the baseline is 3 as the description doesn't add value but the schema structure is minimal.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('banned users for the server'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_user_info' or 'list_members' which might also provide user-related information, though the focus on 'banned' users is specific.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing server_id), exclusions, or compare to related tools like 'unban_member' or 'ban_member', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wowjinxy/mcp-discord'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server