Skip to main content
Glama
bobidk91-ops

Telegram MCP Server

by bobidk91-ops

get_channel_info

Retrieve detailed information about Telegram channels using the Bot API, enabling automated management and monitoring of channel data for bot operations.

Instructions

Get information about the Telegram channel

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler logic for the 'get_channel_info' tool. It uses the TelegramBot instance to call getChat(CHANNEL_ID), retrieves channel details like title, ID, type, username, description, and member count, and returns a formatted text response.
    case 'get_channel_info': {
      const chat = await bot.getChat(CHANNEL_ID);
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: `šŸ“± Channel Information:\n\nšŸ·ļø Title: ${chat.title}\nšŸ†” ID: ${chat.id}\nšŸ“ Type: ${chat.type}\nšŸ‘¤ Username: ${chat.username || 'Not set'}\nšŸ“„ Description: ${chat.description || 'No description'}\nšŸ‘„ Members: ${(chat as any).member_count || 'Unknown'}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:188-195 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get_channel_info' tool in the listTools response, including its name, description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
    {
      name: 'get_channel_info',
      description: 'Get information about the Telegram channel',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
  • Input schema for 'get_channel_info' tool, defined as an empty object since no input parameters are needed.
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {},
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves information, implying it's a read-only operation, but doesn't specify any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the channel doesn't exist. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly. Every word earns its place in conveying the core functionality.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral aspects like authentication or error handling. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should ideally provide more context about what information is returned and under what conditions, but it doesn't, leaving gaps.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. A baseline score of 4 is appropriate since there's nothing missing, but it's not a 5 because the description doesn't explicitly state that no parameters are required, which could be slightly helpful.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('information about the Telegram channel'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like send_message or delete_message by focusing on retrieval rather than modification. However, it doesn't specify what type of information is retrieved (metadata, statistics, etc.), keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it's implied that this is for reading channel information rather than sending or editing content, there's no explicit mention of prerequisites, timing, or comparisons to other tools. This leaves the agent with minimal context for decision-making.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bobidk91-ops/telegram-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server