Bitrix24 MCP server

b24_crm_timeline_add

Add comments or activities to the timeline of any CRM record, including deals, contacts, companies, and leads, to track updates and interactions.

Instructions

Agrega un comentario o actividad a la línea de tiempo de un registro CRM.

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": {
      "entity": "<entity>",
      "entity_id": "<entity_id>",
      "comment": "<comment>"
    },
    "name": "b24_crm_timeline_add"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`entity`	Yes	Tipo de entidad CRM: deal, contact, company, lead
`entity_id`	Yes	ID del registro CRM
`comment`	Yes	Texto del comentario a agregar en la línea de tiempo
`webhook_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0May 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. The description only states the action without elaborating on side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is not overly verbose, though slightly more detail could be added without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the absence of output schema and the relatively simple parameter set, the description misses essential context such as return values, permissions, or behavior when the timeline entry fails. It feels incomplete for a mutation tool.

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?

Schema descriptions cover 3 of 4 parameters with clear meanings. The description adds no extra insight beyond the schema. Although webhook_url lacks a description, the schema provides format hint. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action ('adds a comment or activity') and the resource ('timeline of a CRM record'). It uniquely identifies the tool among siblings as the only timeline-related operation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other CRM mutation tools (e.g., b24_crm_update) or conditions under which it should be avoided. The description lacks contextual hints.

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