Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Telegram MCP

Telegram MCP

by Anonymouse8882
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

pin_chat

Pin a chat to the top of the chat list, or unpin it with the optional parameter.

Instructions

把对话在聊天列表里置顶 / 取消置顶。

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": "pin_chat"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes
unpinNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action (pin/unpin) but fails to describe side effects, permissions required, error conditions, or return behavior. The minimal disclosure is insufficient.

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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but under-informative. It sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, earning a middle score.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the simplicity of the tool (two params, no nested objects, output schema present but unused), the description is too brief. It doesn't explain trigger conditions, return values, or behavior when the chat doesn't exist. More context is needed to avoid agent confusion.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not. It adds no meaning beyond the parameter names—e.g., it doesn't clarify that 'chat' can be a string (username) or integer (chat ID), nor how 'unpin' interacts with the state. This severe lack of context leaves the agent guessing.

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 the tool pins or unpins a conversation in the chat list, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'pin_message' which pins messages within a chat. The verb 'pin/unpin' and resource 'conversation in chat list' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like archive_chat or mute_chat, nor any prerequisites or conditions for pinning/unpinning. The description lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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