Bitrix24 MCP server

b24_tasks_list

List Bitrix24 tasks using filters for responsible person, group, status, deadline, and other criteria to streamline task management.

Instructions

Lista tareas con filtros por responsable, grupo, estado, vencimiento, etc.

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_tasks_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filter`	No	Filtros. Ejemplo: { "RESPONSIBLE_ID": 5, "GROUP_ID": 10, "STATUS": "2" } Status: 1=nueva, 2=pendiente, 3=en proceso, 4=casi vencida, 5=completada, 6=vencida
`select`	No	Campos a retornar. Default: ID, TITLE, STATUS, RESPONSIBLE_ID, DEADLINE. Otros: DESCRIPTION, CREATED_BY, GROUP_ID, PRIORITY, TAGS, CHECKLIST
`order`	No
`all_pages`	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, and the description lacks behavioral disclosures such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, or any side effects. The tool likely performs a read operation, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, brief sentence that conveys the core function. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Despite its simplicity, the description omits crucial context: no output schema, no mention of default returned fields, pagination, or rate limits. For a listing tool with nested parameters, more detail is needed to set expectations.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all parameters, including examples and default values. The description adds general context about filter types but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 it lists tasks with filters by common attributes (responsible, group, status, deadline). The verb 'list' and resource 'tasks' are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like b24_tasks_create or b24_tasks_update.

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. While it's implied for listing tasks, it does not mention exclusions or alternative tools for specific scenarios (e.g., getting a single task).

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