TgPilot

send_poll

Create a poll in a Telegram chat with a question and 2–10 answer options, optionally allowing multiple selections. Use it to gather votes or feedback from group members.

Instructions

Create a poll with 2-10 options.

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>",
      "question": "<question>",
      "options": "<options>"
    },
    "name": "send_poll"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chat`	Yes
`options`	Yes
`multiple`	No
`question`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose one real constraint the schema omits: the 2-10 option limit (the schema has no minItems/maxItems). However, it never says whether the poll is immediately posted to the chat named in 'chat', whether it can be edited or closed afterwards, what permissions are required, or what happens when fewer than 2 or more than 10 options are supplied. The verb 'create' versus the tool name 'send_poll' also leaves the actual side effect slightly ambiguous.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler, and the option-count constraint is front-loaded where the agent will see it. Its brevity is efficient but borders on under-specification for a four-parameter mutation tool.

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?

The tool creates a visible artifact in a chat with four parameters, no annotations, and no parameter documentation; an output schema exists so return values need not be described. Still, the essentials — what 'chat' expects, what 'multiple' toggles, and whether the poll is delivered immediately — are missing, which is not enough for an agent to call this reliably on the first attempt.

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

Parameters2/5

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 for four undocumented parameters. It only partially does so: it explains the cardinality bound on 'options' (2-10), but gives no meaning for 'chat' (ID vs name vs dialog reference), 'question', or the 'multiple' boolean, whose effect on poll behavior is completely unexplained.

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?

"Create a poll" gives a specific verb and resource, and "with 2-10 options" adds a concrete constraint, so the agent knows exactly what artifact is produced. It does not explicitly contrast with the nearest sibling, send_message, leaving the agent to infer that a poll is a distinct chat artifact rather than a message.

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?

There is no statement of when to prefer this over send_message or when a poll is inappropriate, and no prerequisites such as needing to already be in the target chat. Usage is only implied by the verb 'create'.

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