Limzo – Telegram Group Stats
Server Details
Read-only public statistics for Telegram groups tracked by Limzo (https://limzo.com), a group analytics bot. Two tools: get_global_stats (network-wide totals) and get_group_stats (activity, engagement, top members, achievements for a group by its public slug - the last part of its https://limzo.com/s/ URL; browse https://limzo.com/groups/ to find groups). Privacy-safe: payloads never include verbatim member messages. No authentication required. Docs: https://limzo.com/docs/
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.5/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools are clearly distinct: one returns global network-wide statistics, the other returns statistics for a specific group. There is no ambiguity or overlap in their purposes.
Both tools follow a consistent '*get_*_stats*' naming pattern with snake_case, making them predictable and easy to distinguish.
With only 2 tools, the server is minimal. While they cover the core stats functionality, additional tools like group listing or search would be expected for a more complete experience. The count is borderline reasonable but feels thin.
The server covers basic stats retrieval (global and per-group), but lacks features like group listing, search, comparison tools, or historical data beyond 30 days for free users. Notable gaps exist, though the core domain is addressed.
Available Tools
2 toolsget_global_statsGet network-wide Limzo totalsARead-onlyInspect
Call this for network-wide numbers across all public Telegram groups tracked by Limzo (group count, messages, active users, replies, reactions, karma — 7-day and all-time) plus the current top groups by Limzo Score. Also useful to discover example group slugs to query with get_group_stats.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context about the scope (all public groups tracked by Limzo) and the data returned (both 7-day and all-time metrics, plus top groups). It does not mention any side effects or auth needs, but the read-only nature is clear.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences: the first details what the tool returns, the second adds usage guidance. No filler, every part adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 0 parameters, no output schema, and good annotations, the description fully explains the tool's output (specific metrics, timeframes, top groups) and connects to the sibling tool. It is complete for a static summary tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are no parameters (0 params, 100% schema coverage), so the baseline is 4 per guidelines. The description does not need to cover parameter semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool returns network-wide numbers across all tracked Telegram groups, listing specific metrics (group count, messages, active users, etc.) and timeframes (7-day and all-time). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_group_stats by mentioning it provides top groups and can be used to discover group slugs.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Call this for network-wide numbers' and notes it is 'also useful to discover example group slugs to query with get_group_stats,' providing direct guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_group_statsGet public stats for one Telegram groupARead-onlyInspect
Call this when the user asks about the activity, health, leaderboard, mood, or trends of a specific Telegram group tracked by Limzo. slug is the last part of the group's public page URL, limzo.com/s/ (e.g. "hipo"). Returns the curated limzo.public_stats/v1 JSON: messages, replies, active members, daily series, top members, mood, and reactions. Optional range: 7d (default), 30d, all — the wider ranges only serve real data for groups on a paid plan and otherwise silently fall back to 7d, so check range.key in the result. Never includes verbatim member messages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The group's public slug — the last part of its limzo.com/s/<slug> URL. | |
| range | No | Stats window. Defaults to 7d. 30d/all require the group's paid plan; free groups silently fall back to 7d. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations set readOnlyHint=true; no contradiction. Description adds behavioral details: returns curated JSON structure, silent fallback for paid-plan ranges, and exclusion of verbatim messages. This goes beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is information-dense but well-structured: starts with use case, then parameter details, then behavioral caveats. Could be slightly trimmed, but every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers main points: use case, parameters, return type, and fallback. However, lacks detail on output fields (no output schema) and error cases (e.g., invalid slug). Could be more complete for a tool without output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds value: explains 'slug' as last part of URL with example, and describes 'range' fallback behavior. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's enums.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool returns public stats for a single Telegram group, and distinguishes it from sibling 'get_global_stats' by specifying 'one Telegram group'. The verb 'Get' and resource 'public stats' are explicit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicit guidance: 'Call this when the user asks about the activity, health, leaderboard, mood, or trends of a specific Telegram group'. Doesn't explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear enough; also warns about range fallback for free groups.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!