Kommo CRM MCP Server

kommo_list_notes

List notes associated with leads, contacts, or companies in Kommo CRM. Filter by entity type and ID to retrieve specific notes.

Instructions

List notes for a specific entity

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": {
      "entityType": "<entityType>"
    },
    "name": "kommo_list_notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entityType`	Yes
`entityId`	No
`page`	No
`limit`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jun 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

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. It merely restates the function's name without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, result ordering, potential lack of notes, timeouts, or idempotency. The agent receives no practical operational insight.

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 short (one sentence), which is concise but at the expense of necessary information. It is front-loaded with the core action, but too terse to be useful. A slightly longer description with structured details would be more appropriate.

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?

Given four parameters, no output schema, and absent annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not cover pagination, required versus optional parameters, response structure, or error conditions. The agent lacks essential details for effective invocation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameter meanings. It only says 'for a specific entity' without clarifying that 'entityType' and 'entityId' identify the entity, or describing 'page' and 'limit' for pagination. The description adds no semantic value beyond the parameter names.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'List notes for a specific entity' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (notes) with a qualifier (specific entity). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'kommo_get_note' (single note) and 'kommo_create_note' (creation) implicitly, though not explicitly. The purpose is well understood.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'kommo_get_note' for a single note or 'kommo_list_leads' to list entities. There is no specification of prerequisites or context, leaving the agent without decision support.

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

Deploy Server