@zients/line-mcp-server

Unlink Rich Menu from User

unlink_rich_menu_from_user

Remove the rich menu assigned to a specific LINE user using their user ID. This restores the default menu for that user.

Instructions

Unlink the rich menu from a specific user.

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": {
      "userId": "<userId>"
    },
    "name": "unlink_rich_menu_from_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`userId`	Yes	LINE User ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Sep 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the primary effect (unlinking) but does not mention side effects, reversibility, or any error conditions. The description is minimal and does not elaborate on the behavioral outcome beyond the action itself.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the action. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the verb, making it easy to understand without extra fluff.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description is complete for a simple unlink operation. It does not mention return values or side effects, but since no output schema is provided and the action is straightforward, the current description adequately conveys the purpose and expected outcome.

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 schema provides a description for the only parameter (userId: 'LINE User ID'), which covers 100% of the parameters. The tool description does not add any additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action: 'Unlink the rich menu from a specific user.' It specifies the verb and the resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'link_rich_menu_to_user' and 'cancel_default_rich_menu'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions or contexts where unlinking a specific user's rich menu would be preferred over other operations.

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

Deploy Server