Skip to main content
Glama

send_group_message

Send an encrypted text message to a Signal group, with optional @mentions and quotes. Returns a timestamp for reactions or edits.

Instructions

Send a text message to a Signal group. The message is delivered end-to-end encrypted to all group members. Returns the sent timestamp, which can be used as target_timestamp for react_to_message or edit_message. To @mention a member, include their name in the message text and pass a mentions list where each entry has start (character index of the mention in the text), length (character count), and author (E.164 phone number). start/length are UTF-16 code units, not Unicode codepoints — an emoji before the mention shifts the offset by 2, not 1. To reply/quote a message, provide quote_author (sender's phone number) and quote_timestamp (from get_conversation). Use list_groups to get group_id values. Use send_group_attachment to send files or images to a group. Do NOT use for direct messages to a contact — use send_message instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYesMessage text to send
group_idYesGroup ID (from list_groups)
mentionsNoList of @mentions. Each item: {start: offset of the mention in the message (UTF-16 code units, not codepoints), length: mention length (UTF-16 code units), author: E.164 phone number of the mentioned member}. Example: message='Hello @Alice', mentions=[{start:6,length:6,author:'+1234567890'}]
quote_authorNoPhone number (E.164) of the author of the message being quoted
quote_timestampNoTimestamp of the quoted message (from get_conversation)
Install Server

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses end-to-end encryption, delivery to all members, the return value semantics, the UTF-16 code unit pitfall for mentions, and the prerequisite for quoting. It stops short of failure modes or side effects, but for a send operation the disclosed traits are substantial.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, return-value usage, mention encoding caveat, quote requirements, ID provenance, and sibling exclusions. It is front-loaded and logically ordered, with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: how to construct mentions, the encoding gotcha, how to reply/quote, where to get identifiers, what the return value is for, and which sibling to use instead. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the mention encoding with an emoji example, tying the return timestamp to react/edit operations, and clarifying the source of quote_timestamp and group_id. Some redundancy exists with the schema, but the added context pushes it above baseline.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Send a text message to a Signal group.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly contrasting with send_message (direct messages) and send_group_attachment (files/images), so an agent can select it correctly.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: use list_groups to obtain group_id, use send_group_attachment for files, and do NOT use for direct messages (use send_message instead). It also tells when the returned timestamp is useful (for react_to_message or edit_message). This is fully actionable routing.

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

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/googlarz/signal-mcp'

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