Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bale-mcp

bale-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Bot: read chat

bot_read_chat

Retrieve a chat's recent messages from the local store, oldest first, and mark the chat as read. Use it to review a conversation before replying, since Bale keeps no history.

Instructions

Show a chat's recent messages in both directions, oldest first, and mark the chat read.

Comes from the local store (everything this server received or sent); Bale itself keeps no history.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax messages.
chat_idYesNumeric chat id (see bot_list_chats).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / chat_id / description
      Previous value: -"Numeric chat id (from bot_get_new_messages or bot_list_chats)."New value: +"Numeric chat id (see bot_list_chats)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / chat_id / title
      Removed value: -"Chat Id"
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / default
      Previous value: -30New value: +20
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / title
      Removed value: -"Limit"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"bot_read_chatArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "title": "bot_read_chatDictOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, which the description justifies by disclosing the 'mark the chat read' side effect, and it further clarifies data provenance ('Bale itself keeps no history'), explaining why results come from the local store. This adds genuine context beyond the annotation flags, though it omits ordering guarantees for the read-marking side effect and any error behavior.

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?

Two short sentences with the primary action front-loaded, followed by the provenance caveat. Nothing is wasted and no filler is present.

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?

For a two-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, ordering, side effect, and data source well. It could still note the default limit or the message shape returned, but the essentials are present.

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

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (chat_id, limit with default 20/max 500) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Show a chat's recent messages... and mark the chat read') with ordering (oldest first) and a source constraint (local store). It distinguishes itself from bot_get_new_messages by emphasizing 'recent' and 'local store', but never names a sibling, so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied through the 'local store' provenance note, which hints at a distinction from live-fetch siblings like bot_get_new_messages or bot_wait_for_reply. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative, leaving the agent to infer routing.

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