Skip to main content
Glama

dialogbrain

by io.github.saloprj
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

group_create

Create a new group on a channel (Telegram or WhatsApp). Returns the new group's chat ID and invite link.

What this does:

  • Creates a new group with the specified title

  • Returns chat_id, invite_link, and channel_ref for further operations

  • Optionally registers the group in your inbox for monitoring

Returns: success, chat_id, channel_ref, title, thread_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aboutNoOptional description or about text for the group
titleYesTitle/name of the group to create
channelYesChannel to create the group on (e.g., 'telegram', 'whatsapp')
group_typeNoType of group to create. Options: 'supergroup' (default), 'basic'. Telegram-only; ignored on WhatsApp.supergroup
in_workspaceNoRun this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.
participantsNoPeople to put in the group at creation: phone numbers or JIDs on WhatsApp, @usernames or phone numbers on Telegram. Without this the group is created empty and the creator is its only member, which on WhatsApp means nobody can be shown it — there is no invite link to send. Reported back per person in `participants_added` and `participants_failed`.
register_in_inboxNoAuto-register the created group in your inbox for monitoring. Default: true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
+}
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Added

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the write profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the safety burden is partly lifted. The description adds that the group is registered in the inbox by default and lists the returned identifiers, but it says nothing about authorization requirements, failure modes, or what happens to a partially created group when some participants fail.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded well, but the body wastes space: the 'What this does' bullet 'Creates a new group with the specified title' merely restates sentence one, and the closing 'Returns: success, chat_id, channel_ref, title, thread_id' duplicates the earlier chat ID / invite link sentence without reconciling the two lists.

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?

For a mutating, no-output-schema tool with seven parameters, the description supplies the essential return contract (chat_id, invite_link, channel_ref) that an agent needs to chain follow-up calls, and annotations cover the safety profile. It is only missing error/edge behavior and any usage routing, which keeps it from a 5.

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% and the schema itself is unusually rich (participants, group_type, in_workspace all fully documented), so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the title field and hints at register_in_inbox; it adds no semantics the schema does not already carry.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb+resource+scope: create a new group on a channel, limited to Telegram or WhatsApp. That is enough to separate it from join/leave/moderate siblings, but the description never names an alternative tool, so it stops short of explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description never mentions group_join, group_add, group_add_member, or any condition that would select this tool over them, and it states no prerequisites (e.g. that the channel must already be connected).

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