Skip to content

Documentation for Guild Join Requests, aka Server Member Applications - #8531

Open
colinloretz wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
member-applications
Open

Documentation for Guild Join Requests, aka Server Member Applications#8531
colinloretz wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
member-applications

Conversation

@colinloretz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Adding docs for Guild Join Request Endpoints:

  • List Guild Join Requests
  • Action Guild Join Request

Guild Join Request Gateway events:

  • Guild Join Request Create
  • Guild Join Request Update
  • Guild Join Request Delete

These endpoints and events require the KICK_MEMBERS permission, and the guild must have both the MEMBER_VERIFICATION_GATE_ENABLED and MEMBER_VERIFICATION_MANUAL_APPROVAL.

@colinloretz
colinloretz requested a review from a team as a code owner August 7, 2026 20:28
@colinloretz
colinloretz requested review from abe-discord and removed request for a team August 7, 2026 20:28
@mintlify

mintlify Bot commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project Status Preview Updated (UTC)
Discord 🟢 Ready View Preview Aug 7, 2026, 8:30 PM

💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you.

Comment on lines +41 to +46
| Value | Description |
|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
| STARTED | applicant started but has not yet submitted their join request |
| SUBMITTED | applicant submitted their join request, which is awaiting review |
| APPROVED | join request was approved |
| REJECTED | join request was rejected |

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This goes against the current structure of using numeric enums to represent values like these...

@Lulalaby Lulalaby Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

since this feature was made during the clan alpha (and even earlier, back in old DMD days, with earlier versions of member applications), it always used this. I'd assume that it's too much of a breaking change to change that now.
But maybe we could get a compability field?

Comment on lines +110 to +115
| Value | Description |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
| TERMS | field requiring the applicant to acknowledge a list of terms |
| TEXT_INPUT | short text input field |
| PARAGRAPH | long-form text input field |
| MULTIPLE_CHOICE | field where the applicant selects one of many options |

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ditto, I would've assumed this would follow a shape similar to message components (numeric values, not strings)

@colinloretz colinloretz changed the title Documentation for Guild Join Requests, aka Member Applications Documentation for Guild Join Requests, aka Server Member Applications Aug 7, 2026
#### Guild Join Request Create

<Warning>
If using [Gateway Intents](/developers/events/gateway#gateway-intents), the `GUILD_MODERATION` intent will be required to receive this event.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The "If" part here is inconsistent with intents declared elsewhere:

This endpoint requires the `READ_MESSAGE_HISTORY` permission and the `MESSAGE_CONTENT` [Privileged Intent](/developers/events/gateway#privileged-intents).

<Warning>
This endpoint requires the `GUILD_MEMBERS` [Privileged Intent](/developers/events/gateway#privileged-intents).
</Warning>

The documentation is written for API v10 in mind, no?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants