Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
telegram-mcp

telegram-mcp

by dikaglorya
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Mark chat read

telegram_mark_read

Mark all messages in a Telegram chat as read to clear unread counters and keep conversations up to date.

Instructions

Mark all messages in a chat as read.

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": "telegram_mark_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds nothing beyond the one-liner: it doesn't say whether the operation is idempotent, whether it affects the peer's read receipt, or whether it must be authorized for that chat.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Nothing redundant or padded.

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?

A state-mutating tool with no output schema and an undocumented required parameter needs more than one sentence. Key facts an agent needs — identifier format, permission requirements, scope of 'all messages' — are absent.

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 coverage is 0% for the single 'chat' parameter, so the description carries the burden. Saying 'in a chat' only weakly implies the parameter identifies the target chat; it gives no accepted identifier format (username, id, phone) or meaning beyond that.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Mark all messages in a chat as read'), which is unambiguous about the operation. It does not differentiate from siblings that also touch read state implicitly (e.g., telegram_get_history), but the action itself is crisp.

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 when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. An agent gets no guidance on when marking a chat read is appropriate versus simply fetching history, which also often marks messages read.

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