Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DialogBrain

by com.dialogbrain.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

group_add_member

Add a member to an existing group on Telegram or WhatsApp.

What this does:

  • Adds the specified member to the group

  • Resolves the member by username, phone number, or JID

  • Reports if the member is already in the group

Returns: success, chat_id, member, already_member.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
memberYesThe member to add (format depends on channel: @username on Telegram, phone on WhatsApp)
channelYesChannel where the group exists (e.g., 'telegram', 'whatsapp')
chat_idYesID of the group/channel to add the member to. Group id exactly as `group.list` reports it: a signed numeric id on Telegram, or a JID ending in @g.us on WhatsApp. A WhatsApp group has no numeric id, so this is a string either way. Read it from `group.list`; never compose one.
account_idNoWhich of the workspace's accounts on this channel acts (from channels.list). OMIT to use the account the group's conversation is filed on.
in_workspaceNoRun this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / account_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which of the workspace's accounts on this channel acts (from channels.list). OMIT to use the account the group's conversation is filed on.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_workspace
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Run this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds real context beyond that: it explains member resolution (username/phone/JID) and that re-adding an existing member is reported via an already_member field rather than failing. It does not mention permission requirements or rate limits, so not a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then a short bullet list and a Returns line. The bullets largely restate the opening sentence, but the whole thing is small and easy to scan.

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?

Five parameters are fully described by the schema and there is no output schema, so the description's explicit Returns line (success, chat_id, member, already_member) is a meaningful addition. Missing only admin/permission prerequisites and sibling disambiguation.

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 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in detail (including chat_id's 'never compose one' warning). The description only adds the JID resolution hint for member, which is modest incremental value over the schema.

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 ('Add a member to an existing group') and names the supported channels. However, siblings like group_add and group_join exist and the description never explains how this differs from them, leaving the agent to guess between three superficially similar tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose statement and the 'existing group' qualifier, which hints that group creation is elsewhere. But there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of group_add/group_join as alternatives or prerequisites such as being an admin.

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

All DialogBrain toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources