Bitrix24 MCP server

b24_groups_list

List Bitrix24 workgroups and projects filtered by active status and visibility settings.

Instructions

Lista grupos de trabajo (workgroups y proyectos) con filtros por estado y visibilidad.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "b24_groups_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filter`	No	Filtros. Ejemplo: { "ACTIVE": "Y", "VISIBLE": "Y" }. Campos: NAME, ACTIVE, VISIBLE, OPENED, PROJECT
`select`	No
`webhook_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0May 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the burden. It only states it lists with filters, implying a read operation, but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, return format, or any side effects. Lacks depth.

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?

Single sentence with no redundant information. Action and resource are front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

No output schema exists, yet description does not explain return values or pagination. For a list tool, this is a significant gap. Does not cover all parameter behaviors or usage context.

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?

Description adds meaning for the 'filter' parameter by mentioning 'filtros por estado y visibilidad', but does not explain 'select' or 'webhook_url'. Schema coverage is 33%, so description partially compensates.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Lista' (lists) and the resource 'grupos de trabajo (workgroups y proyectos)', and mentions filtering by status and visibility. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like b24_users_list or b24_departments_list.

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 like b24_departments_list or b24_tasks_list. Does not specify context, prerequisites, or when not to use.

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