Skip to main content
Glama

list_rpop

Remove and return elements from the right end of a Redis list to process queue items or retrieve stored data in order.

Instructions

右侧弹出列表

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes列表键名
countNo弹出数量(可选)

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'list_rpop' that ensures Redis connection and calls rpop on the RedisService with key and optional count.
    private async handleListRpop(args: any) {
      this.ensureRedisConnection();
      const result = await this.redisService!.rpop(args.key, args.count);
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2)
          }
        ]
      };
    }
  • Registration of the 'list_rpop' tool in the ListTools response, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'list_rpop',
      description: '右侧弹出列表',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          key: { type: 'string', description: '列表键名' },
          count: { type: 'number', description: '弹出数量(可选)' }
        },
        required: ['key']
      }
    },
  • Dispatcher case in CallToolRequestSchema handler that routes 'list_rpop' calls to the handleListRpop method.
    case 'list_rpop':
      return await this.handleListRpop(args);
Behavior2/5

Does 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. '弹出' (pop) implies a destructive operation that removes elements, but the description doesn't specify whether elements are returned, what happens when the list is empty, whether this is atomic, or any performance characteristics. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation name.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely concise (4 Chinese characters) but under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While it doesn't waste words, it fails to provide the minimal necessary context for understanding the tool's purpose and behavior. The single phrase doesn't constitute a properly structured description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive list operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (the popped elements), error conditions (e.g., non-existent key, wrong data type), or how it differs from similar tools. The context signals show this is part of a Redis toolset, but the description doesn't leverage that context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage with clear Chinese descriptions for both parameters ('列表键名' for key, '弹出数量(可选)' for count). The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '右侧弹出列表' (right-side pop list) is a tautology that restates the tool name 'list_rpop' in Chinese. It doesn't specify what resource is being operated on (Redis list), what 'pop' means in this context (removing and returning elements), or how this differs from sibling tools like 'list_lpop' (left-side pop). The purpose is vague without additional context.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose 'list_rpop' over 'list_lpop' (for right-side vs left-side operations), 'list_range' (for reading without removal), or other list manipulation tools. There's no indication of prerequisites, error conditions, or typical use cases.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/pickstar-2002/redis-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server