Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
telegram-mcp

telegram-mcp

by dikaglorya
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Pin / unpin message

telegram_pin_message

Pin or unpin a message in a Telegram chat to mark important content, with optional notification to chat members.

Instructions

Pin or unpin a message in a chat.

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>",
      "messageId": "<messageId>"
    },
    "name": "telegram_pin_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes
unpinNo
notifyNo
messageIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write nature is known; the description adds essentially nothing beyond that. It omits whether pinning notifies chat members, whether it replaces or accumulates with existing pins, and what permissions are required for a chat-wide mutation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for what it conveys, though that size is also a symptom of its thinness rather than a virtue of economy.

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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with zero schema descriptions, no output schema, and only minimal annotations, this description is not sufficient. Key operational details (notify behavior, pin limits, permission requirements) are entirely 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and fails to compensate. It implies the unpin toggle but says nothing about 'notify' (presumably controlling member notification) or the format expected for 'chat' and 'messageId'.

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 states a specific verb pair (pin/unpin) and resource (a message in a chat), which is clearer than the name alone and readable without opening the schema. It does not differentiate from closely related siblings like telegram_unpin_all or telegram_pin_chat, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to pin versus unpin, nor any mention of the sibling telegram_unpin_all that also removes pins. An agent gets no routing information and must infer everything from the boolean flag.

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