Contacts do Kommo. action: list (busca paginada com filtros), get (por id), create (cria, body em data), update (atualiza; com id = 1 item, sem id = bulk com array em data).
[Flattened action: list]
Bulk support: accepts ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | ||
| ids | No | ||
| data | No | ||
| page | No | ||
| with | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| order | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| filter | No | ||
| account | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, yet the description implies a list operation (typically read-only). This is a contradiction because the flattened action is 'list' but the tool is not marked as read-only. No additional behavioral details (e.g., pagination limits, filtering syntax, side effects) are disclosed beyond the conflicting annotation.
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 short but poorly structured. It mixes actions, uses mixed language (Portuguese/English), and includes a confusing note about flattened actions. The key purpose is buried, and there is no front-loading of the list-specific behavior.
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?
With 10 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, this description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what the list returns, pagination behavior, filter usage, or any response format. The tool is essentially unusable based on the provided description.
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?
Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'data' and 'id' in context of create/update, but for the list action it only vaguely says 'busca paginada com filtros' without explaining parameters like page, limit, filter, query, with, order, or account. No parameter semantics are provided.
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 is ambiguous: it lists multiple actions (list, get, create, update) before noting '[Flattened action: list]', which muddles the tool's primary purpose. It doesn't clearly state that this tool is exclusively for listing contacts, and the inclusion of other actions confuses the agent.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this list tool versus sibling tools like kommo_contacts_get, kommo_contacts_create, or kommo_contacts_update. The description only mentions bulk support and batched execution, but not selection criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.