bitrix_create_activity

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does disclose that the operation is a write that requires confirm=true and that one of dealId/contactId is needed, which is safety-relevant. It does not describe return shape, permissions, or downstream effects such as activity history or notifications.

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?

Three short, purposeful sentences with the purpose first, followed by the two critical constraints. There is no filler or unnecessary repetition of schema details.

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 9-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is somewhat sparse. The schema covers parameter meanings and the description adds confirm and identifier preconditions, but it does not address type-specific behaviors such as whether a meeting or call needs startTime/endTime, nor what the API returns.

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 schema covers all nine parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by encoding a disjunctive dependency not present in the JSON Schema: dealId or contactId should be supplied. It also reinforces that confirm must be true, which is important for correct invocation.

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 action and resource: create an activity in CRM, explicitly listing the three subtypes (call, meeting, task). It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like bitrix_create_task or bitrix_schedule_meeting, so it misses the full differentiation standard.

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 gives practical call prerequisites: 'Требует confirm=true' and 'Укажите dealId или contactId'. However, it does not explain when to prefer this tool over related alternatives such as bitrix_create_task or bitrix_schedule_meeting, so alternative-selection guidance is missing.

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