Refinement of the Telegram script

Refine the existing Python script based on Telethon, which performs:

parsing participants of a Telegram group into a database;

adding these participants to the contacts of several Telegram accounts.

Target logic:

any users, including those without a username and phone number, should be added to the contacts of each account.

🧱 Current architecture

account_1

Parses participants from the Telegram group.

Saves user data into an SQLite database.

Successfully adds users to its contacts.

account_2 … account_30 take users from the same database.

Each account takes its share (without overlaps).

They attempt to add users to their contacts.

✅ Current status

Works:

Parsing participants from the group into the database (account_1).

Adding users to the contacts of account_1.

Partially works adding contacts from account_2 (a few users are added).

Correct distribution of users among accounts;

fixation of which account the user was added by;

avoiding re-adding the same user by different accounts.

❌ Does not work:

account_3 … account_30:

cannot correctly retrieve users from the database;

or they retrieve them but cannot add them to contacts;

errors occur such as:

Could not find the input entity for PeerUser

The provided contact ID is invalid

🎯 Expected result (what needs to be done)

Redesign the logic for adding contacts so that:

each account independently accesses users before adding;

it does not depend on who exactly (account_1 or another) parsed these users.

Ensure that:

account_2 … account_30 can add any group participants to their contacts;

including those without a username and phone number;

without the need for prior interaction (messages) with the user.

Maintain the use of:

Python

Telethon library

SQLite (or suggest another DB with justification).

⚠️ Critical note

Currently, the architecture works only for the first account, indicating a problem with:

retrieving entity / access_hash for other accounts;

or Telegram limitations that have not been correctly handled in the code.

This is a key issue that needs to be resolved.

📌 Additionally

The solution should be:

stable for any number of accounts;