telegram-bot-mcp

edit_business_message_caption

Update the caption of a media message sent from your business account. Specify the new caption and the message identifiers to edit.

Instructions

Edit caption of a media message sent on behalf of a business account.

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": {
      "business_connection_id": "<business_connection_id>",
      "chat_id": "<chat_id>",
      "message_id": "<message_id>",
      "caption": "<caption>"
    },
    "name": "edit_business_message_caption"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`caption`	Yes	New caption text (up to 1024 characters)
`chat_id`	Yes	Chat ID of the message
`message_id`	Yes	ID of the message to edit
`parse_mode`	No	Caption formatting mode
`reply_markup`	No	JSON string with inline keyboard markup
`business_connection_id`	Yes	Business connection ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv3.0.3Mar 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states a mutation operation ('edit') but lacks details on permissions, error handling, or side effects. Minimal transparency beyond the basic action.

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?

Single sentence that is concise and directly states the tool's purpose with no extraneous information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple edit operation, the description covers the core purpose but lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., need for business_connection_id) and return behavior. No output schema, but the tool is straightforward. Missing guidance on media-only applicability.

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 description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since parameters are well-documented in the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'Edit caption' and specifies the resource as 'media message sent on behalf of a business account', distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_business_message_media and edit_business_message_text, as well as the general edit_message_caption.

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 edit_business_message_media or edit_business_message_text. The context of sibling tools implies differentiation but the description provides no explicit usage context or when-not-to-use.

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

Deploy Server