Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Telegram MCP

Telegram MCP

by Anonymouse8882
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

send_reaction

React to a Telegram message with an emoji, or remove an existing reaction by setting the remove flag.

Instructions

给一条消息加/取消表情回应。

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_id": "<message_id>"
    },
    "name": "send_reaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes
emojiNo👍
removeNo
message_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions adding/canceling reactions but lacks details on limits, idempotency, or effects on existing reactions.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Single sentence, no wasted words. Could be expanded without losing conciseness.

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 4 parameters (2 required) and 0% schema description coverage, the description lacks parameter semantics and usage context. Output schema exists but not referenced. Incomplete for an effective tool.

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% and the description does not explain any parameters (chat, message_id, emoji, remove). The agent has no guidance on how to use them.

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 description clearly states the tool adds/cancels emoji reactions to messages, which is a specific action. It distinguishes from many sibling tools (e.g., send_message, get_message_reactions) but does not explicitly differentiate from related reaction tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_message_reactions or edit_message. No conditions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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