Bitrix24 MCP server

b24_tasks_get

Retrieve full task details from Bitrix24 by task ID. Get all task metadata and specified fields.

Instructions

Obtiene el detalle completo de una tarea por ID.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "b24_tasks_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	ID de la tarea
`select`	No	Campos a retornar
`webhook_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0May 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the core read behavior and expected result (full task detail). However, it does not mention return shape, error behavior, how the optional 'select' parameter affects the 'detalle completo' promise, or any webhook-related behavior.

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?

The description is a single, direct, front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a simple getter, this is appropriately concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no annotations, no output schema, and only 67% parameter coverage, so the description is thinner than ideal. The core action and key parameter are clear enough to make a basic call, but usage alternatives, webhook_url semantics, and return behavior are left unspecified.

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 description coverage is 67%; 'id' and 'select' are already documented in the schema. The description adds only that the task is fetched by ID, which reinforces 'id' but adds nothing about the undocumented 'webhook_url' parameter.

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 'Obtiene el detalle completo de una tarea por ID' states a specific verb, resource, and access key. It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like b24_tasks_list (collection), b24_tasks_create, b24_tasks_update, and b24_tasks_complete (mutations).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'por ID' phrase implies this is the single-record fetch tool to use when a task ID is already known, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with b24_tasks_list or state when not to use this tool, leaving selection partly to inference.

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