Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Telegram MCP

Telegram MCP

by Anonymouse8882
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_messages

Delete messages in a chat. Optionally revoke them for all participants (cannot be undone, confirm with user first).

Instructions

删除消息。revoke=True 表示同时为对方删除（不可恢复，请先向用户确认）。

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>",
      "message_ids": "<message_ids>"
    },
    "name": "delete_messages"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes
revokeNo
message_idsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that revoke=True is irreversible and requires user confirmation, but does not cover other aspects like required permissions or whether deletion is only for the user or complete removal.

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 consists of two short sentences with no redundancy. The action and critical warning are front-loaded, making it efficient and clear.

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 deletion tool with three parameters, the description covers the important revoke behavior and user confirmation. Output schema exists, so return values are documented elsewhere. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no mention of scope or limits), but it is mostly complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains the revoke parameter's behavior and its implications. The other parameters (chat, message_ids) are self-explanatory, but the description adds critical nuance for revoke.

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 explicitly states 'Delete messages', which is a specific verb-resource pair. The sibling tools include delete_chat and delete_chat_history, making this tool clearly distinct for deleting individual messages.

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 explains the revoke parameter's effect and warns about irreversibility and user confirmation. It does not explicitly compare with alternatives, but the context provided is sufficient for safe usage.

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