Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Claudegram

Claudegram

by sanjar-x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_contacts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the full list of contacts from your connected Telegram account. Access all saved contacts with their details in one call.

Instructions

Список всех контактов аккаунта.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe, non-mutating operation. The description adds no extra behavioral details beyond the basic purpose—such as ordering, inclusion of blocked contacts, or pagination—so it contributes no new transparency beyond structured fields.

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, brief sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the core meaning and perfectly sized for a zero-parameter tool, earning every word it uses.

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

Completeness4/5

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, output schema present), the one-line description is nearly complete. It could mention whether the list is sorted or includes all contact types, but the availability of an output schema and no parameters makes this adequate. A 4 reflects that it's sufficient but could offer marginal extra context.

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, so the absence of parameter details in the description is appropriate. The schema is fully covered (100% coverage) since there are no properties, and the baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 clearly identifies the tool as listing all contacts of the account, using the noun 'список' (list). It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like add_contact, delete_contact, and import_contacts, and there is no ambiguity about the resource (contacts) and the operation (listing).

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 such as search_global or get_dialogs, and no exclusion criteria are mentioned. It simply states what it does, leaving usage context entirely implicit.

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