Fetch paginated company lists from Kommo CRM, filtered by company name and scoped to a client account using the client slug.
Busca uma lista de empresas cadastradas no CRM.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | Termo de busca (nome da empresa) | |
| client_slug | Yes | Identificador do cliente (slug) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool searches for a list, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, the need for client_slug, whether results are read-only, or any other operational traits.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the main action, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin. It does not mention pagination defaults, the required client_slug, what fields are returned, or how this list differs from similar entities like contacts or leads.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 50%: query and client_slug have descriptions, while page and limit do not. The tool description does not explain the pagination parameters or how query relates to filtering, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action and resource: 'Busca uma lista de empresas cadastradas no CRM' (searches for a list of companies registered in the CRM). This makes the tool's purpose understandable, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like get_contacts or get_leads.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_contacts, get_leads, or create_company. The description provides no context about use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites beyond simply listing companies.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.