Skip to main content
Glama
acquo

LINE Bot MCP Server (SSE Support)

by acquo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_message_quota

Check monthly message quota and current usage for LINE Official Accounts to monitor API limits and manage messaging capacity.

Instructions

Get the message quota and consumption of the LINE Official Account. This shows the monthly message limit and current usage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • src/tools/getMessageQuota.ts:14-29 (handler)
    The register method defines and registers the "get_message_quota" tool with the MCP server, including its handler logic that calls the MessagingApiClient to fetch quota and consumption data.
    register(server: McpServer) {
  server.tool(
    "get_message_quota",
    "Get the message quota and consumption of the LINE Official Account. This shows the monthly message limit and current usage.",
    {},
    async () => {
      const messageQuotaResponse = await this.client.getMessageQuota();
      const messageQuotaConsumptionResponse =
        await this.client.getMessageQuotaConsumption();
      const response = {
        limited: messageQuotaResponse.value,
        totalUsage: messageQuotaConsumptionResponse.totalUsage,
      };
      return createSuccessResponse(response);
    },
  );

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.1-local

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates this is a read-only operation ('Get') and specifies the data returned (quota and consumption), but does not disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or data freshness. It adds basic context but lacks operational details.

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?

The description is two concise sentences with zero waste: the first states the purpose, and the second elaborates on the returned data. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the basic purpose and output semantics, but lacks context on usage scenarios, error handling, or integration with sibling tools, leaving gaps for an agent to infer operational details.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose. A baseline of 4 is applied as it efficiently handles the parameter-free case.

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Get') and resource ('message quota and consumption of the LINE Official Account'), with explicit details about what information is retrieved ('monthly message limit and current usage'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on messaging, broadcasting, or database operations.

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?

The description implies usage for monitoring message usage on LINE Official Accounts, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for checking limits before sending messages) or any exclusions. It lacks named alternatives or contextual boundaries.

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