Refactor: Tool Cleanup for Reliability and Compatibility

[l1v0n1]

Summary

This pull request focuses on improving the stability and compatibility of the Telegram MCP server by removing tools that were either unreliable or incompatible with the expected MCP environment.

Changes Included

1. Removed File Handling Tools:

   • Removed tools relying on direct file_path arguments (send_file, download_media, set_profile_photo, edit_chat_photo, send_voice, send_sticker, upload_file).
   • Reason: These tools assumed direct file system access via absolute paths, which is not reliably supported by the MCP interaction model for attached files.

2. Removed GIF Handling Tools:

   • Removed get_gif_search, get_saved_gifs, and send_gif.
   • Reason: Despite attempts to refactor and fix (get_gif_search implementation updated, get_saved_gifs added, logging added to send_gif), these tools continued to exhibit unreliable behavior and errors, likely due to underlying library/API complexities or inconsistencies. They have been removed to ensure overall toolset stability.

3. Documentation Updates:

   • Updated README.md to remove references to the deleted file and GIF tools in the "Features & Tools" list.
   • Added notes to the "Removed Functionality" section in README.md explaining why these toolsets were removed.

Impact

• Reduces the number of available tools but increases the reliability of the remaining set.
• Aligns the toolset more closely with the practical limitations observed in the MCP environment.

Notes

At the end, make sure you've released new version

[l1v0n1]

@chigwell could
you review?

[chigwell]

@l1v0n1 Yes.

Additionally, I’d like to ask your opinion on something:
I’m planning to add you as an admin of this repository as well. Alongside that, I’d like to propose a rule that would prevent anyone (including me) from pushing commits directly to the main branch.

Instead, all changes should be made via pull requests, and each PR must be approved by another admin before being merged - meaning, my changes could only be merged with your approval, and yours with mine.

What do you think about this approach? Would you be okay with it?

[l1v0n1]

Hey @chigwell, thanks for the trust! I’m cool with being an admin and I like the PR rule—keeps things tight and stable. Mutual approvals sound good too, helps us catch stuff early. I’m in!

[chigwell]

Ok, thank you. I will set this up in the next couple of days