Bitrix24 MCP server

b24_users_list

Retrieve active Bitrix24 users with name, email, position, department, and online status. Apply filters to narrow results by department or name.

Instructions

Lista usuarios activos con nombre, email, cargo, departamento y estado online.

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_users_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filter`	No	Filtros. Default: { ACTIVE: true }. Otros: { "UF_DEPARTMENT": 5, "NAME": "Brian" }
`select`	No	Campos a retornar. Default: ID, NAME, LAST_NAME, EMAIL, WORK_POSITION, UF_DEPARTMENT, IS_ONLINE
`all_pages`	No
`webhook_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0May 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention that the default filter includes only active users, that pagination is handled via all_pages, or that webhook_url can be used. The behavior of the 'select' parameter is also not described.

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 tool's purpose. While structured additional details would be helpful, the brevity is not detrimental given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description lacks important context: it does not explain the return format, pagination behavior, or how to apply custom filters beyond the default. Given that the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient for complete agent understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions (filter and select). The description adds no information about any parameters. For parameters like all_pages and webhook_url, no meaning is provided beyond the schema definition. The description could have compensated but does not.

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 it lists active users with specific fields (name, email, position, department, online status). The verb 'lista' and resource 'usuarios activos' are precise and distinguish from sibling tools like b24_departments_list or b24_groups_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 is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as b24_departments_list or b24_groups_list. The description only says what it does, not when or when not to use it.

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