List all bins in Flow Boards to view and manage your boards' containers. Use this to get an overview of available bins for organizing tickets and flows.
List all bins.
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": "list_bins"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the action ('List all bins') without adding context such as pagination, permissions, or whether archived bins are included. This provides little transparency beyond the name.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the action and resource. It contains no filler or redundant content, earning a perfect score for conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple profile (0 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but lacks details about the return format, what constitutes a 'bin' in this context, or any limitations on the listing. It does not compensate fully for the absence of structured metadata.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (vacuously), so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description does not need to explain any parameters because there are none.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb 'list' and resource 'bins' with scope 'all', clearly distinguishing it from get_bin and other bin operations. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of the highest clarity level.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage context is only implied by the tool name and description; there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus get_bin or other listing tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, making this minimally adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.