list_rich_menusList all rich menus for a LINE Official Account to review and manage them.
List all rich menus for the LINE Official Account.
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_rich_menus"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations and no mention of side effects, permissions, output format, or pagination. The description only says 'list', which implies a read-only operation, but does not clarify what the response contains or whether any limits apply.
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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It directly states the action and object.
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?
For a simple list operation, the description covers the basic function, but it lacks details about the response structure, such as whether it returns a list of menu objects or includes metadata. Without an output schema, this missing information leaves some ambiguity.
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 the schema coverage is 100% since there is nothing to document. The description adds no confusion and is consistent with an empty parameter set.
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 clearly states the verb 'list', the resource 'rich menus', and the scope 'for the LINE Official Account'. It unambiguously distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_rich_menu which fetches a single menu or create_rich_menu which creates one.
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?
The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the name and phrase 'all' imply it is for retrieving the full set of rich menus. It lacks direct guidance such as 'when you need to see all menus' or contrast with get_rich_menu.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.