ListPlus

Change or remove a rule

update_trigger

Destructive

FREE (key, Set up) — pause, activate, change or remove (remove: true) a rule of a list. Your own rules with the rights of their actions; a rule a person or another connection set up only with the list shared in Full — ask your user first. actions replaces the rule's actions (an enrich action named again keeps its settings' place; one left out goes). Enrichment only on your own rules.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "list_id": "<list_id>",
      "trigger_id": "<trigger_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_trigger"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`on`	No
`name`	No
`remove`	No
`status`	No
`actions`	No
`list_id`	Yes	The list's id (describe_list shows the lists shared with you)
`language`	No	Language of `tell_your_user` and of Yes/No words in new columns (default en)
`conditions`	No	Groups are OR-ed, the conditions inside a group AND-ed: { groups: [[cond, cond], [cond]] }
`trigger_id`	Yes
`include_existing`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it says `actions` replaces the action set wholesale, that a re-named enrich action retains its settings position, and that any action left out is deleted — a concrete disclosure of what the destructiveHint actually destroys. The permission model (own rules vs. rules others created, enrichment limited to own rules) is information the annotations do not carry.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads cost/access tier and purpose before permissions and parameter semantics; three sentences with almost no waste. The em-dash fragments make it slightly harder to scan but do not introduce noise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive mutation over a nested 10-parameter schema with no output schema, the definition covers permissions and action replacement well, but leaves `conditions`, `include_existing`, and `status` unexplained and does not say what happens to a rule's history or how removal is confirmed.

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 coverage is only 30% across 10 parameters, and the description compensates for the two riskiest ones: `remove` and the replacement semantics of `actions` (including its max-5, ordered behavior). Nothing is said about `status`, `on`, `name`, `language`, `conditions`, or `include_existing`, which is a meaningful gap at this coverage level.

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?

States specific verbs (pause, activate, change, remove) against a specific resource (a rule of a list), and explicitly ties the removal case to `remove: true`. An agent can distinguish this from create_trigger or add_records without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear when-to-use conditions plus exclusions: your own rules can be modified freely, a rule set up by a person or another connection requires the Full-shared list permission and an explicit check with the user. It does not name a sibling alternative for any case, but the operating context is well stated.

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

All ListPlus tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?