Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Telegram MCP

Telegram MCP

by Anonymouse8882
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_chat_history

Clear messages from a chat with explicit confirmation. Supports selective removal by message ID and revoking for all participants.

Instructions

清空一个对话的历史记录（不可恢复，必须传 confirm=True）。

Args: chat: 对话。 confirm: 必须显式传 True 才会执行。 revoke_for_everyone: 私聊时同时为对方删除。 max_id: 只清空 ID 小于等于它的消息，0 表示全部。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "chat": "<chat>"
    },
    "name": "delete_chat_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes
max_idNo
confirmNo
revoke_for_everyoneNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: irreversibility, the need for explicit confirmation, optional revoke_for_everyone for private chats, and max_id for partial clearing. No contradictions.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear warning at the start followed by an Args list. Every sentence adds value without repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: action, irreversibility, parameter semantics, and scoping (max_id). An output schema exists, so return values need not be described.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates completely by explaining all four parameters (chat, confirm, revoke_for_everyone, max_id), their meanings, and constraints (e.g., confirm must be True, max_id=0 clears all).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states '清空一个对话的历史记录' (clear a chat's history) and emphasizes irreversibility and the confirm requirement. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_chat and delete_messages by focusing on history clearing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for usage (clearing chat history) and includes a critical constraint (must pass confirm=True). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives like delete_messages.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools