Skip to main content
Glama

send_key_to_telegram

Securely transmit cryptocurrency wallet keys or mnemonics to Telegram for backup or sharing purposes within the Armor Crypto MCP server.

Instructions

Send the mnemonic or private key to telegram.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
private_key_requestYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler function for 'send_key_to_telegram', registered with @mcp.tool(). It checks authentication and delegates to the ArmorWalletAPIClient instance.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def send_key_to_telegram(private_key_request: PrivateKeyRequest) -> Dict:
        """
        Send the mnemonic or private key to telegram.
        """
        if not armor_client:
            return [{"error": "Not logged in"}]
        try:
            result: Dict = await armor_client.send_key_to_telegram(private_key_request)
            return result
        except Exception as e:
            return [{"error": str(e)}]
  • Pydantic input schema/model for the send_key_to_telegram tool, defining wallet name and key type (private key or mnemonic).
    class PrivateKeyRequest(BaseModel):
        wallet: str = Field(description="Name of the wallet to get the mnemonic or private key for")
        key_type: Literal['PRIVATE_KEY', 'MNEMONIC'] = Field(description="Whether to return the private or mnemonic key")
  • Core implementation in ArmorWalletAPIClient that sends a POST request to the '/users/telegram/send-message/' API endpoint with the PrivateKeyRequest payload.
    async def send_key_to_telegram(self, data: PrivateKeyRequest) -> Dict:
        """Send the mnemonic or private key to telegram."""
        payload = data.model_dump(exclude_none=True)
        return await self._api_call("POST", f"users/telegram/send-message/", payload)
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the send_key_to_telegram function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: it doesn't mention security risks (e.g., exposing private keys), authentication needs, rate limits, or what the output might be. The description is dangerously incomplete for a tool handling sensitive data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it's under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It front-loads the action but lacks necessary details. While not verbose, it fails to earn its place by omitting critical information.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the high complexity (sensitive operation with 1 parameter, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but has output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't address security implications, usage context, or parameter details, making it inadequate for safe and effective tool invocation.

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

Parameters1/5

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. It mentions 'mnemonic or private key' but doesn't explain the 'private_key_request' parameter's structure, format, or requirements. No additional meaning is provided beyond the vague reference, leaving the parameter undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action ('Send') and target ('to telegram'), but it's vague about what exactly is being sent ('the mnemonic or private key') without specifying the purpose or context. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'transfer_tokens' or 'create_wallet', which might involve similar security-sensitive operations. The description is not tautological but lacks specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings like 'transfer_tokens' or security-related tools, there's no indication of prerequisites, risks, or appropriate contexts. The description is misleading as it implies sending sensitive data without safety warnings.

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/emmaThompson07/armor-crypto-mcp'

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