Start a sales bot for a specific lead or contact in Kommo CRM to automate follow-up and drive engagement.
Inicia um Salesbot (robô) para um Lead ou Contato específico.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bot_id | Yes | ID do Salesbot que deve ser iniciado | |
| entity_id | Yes | ID da entidade (ex: ID do Lead ou do Contato) | |
| client_slug | Yes | Identificador do cliente (slug) | |
| entity_type | Yes | Tipo de entidade ('leads' ou 'contacts') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention side effects (e.g., that the bot may start sending messages), prerequisites, reversibility, idempotency, or how to stop the bot afterward. For a mutation-like tool this is a significant gap.
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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and target, and every word adds meaning. It is appropriately sized for the straightforward purpose it serves.
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?
Despite complete schema coverage, the description omits any behavioral or usage context for a tool that launches an external process. With no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left without information about expected return values, side effects, or post-launch lifecycle. The complexity of a launch action demands more than this one-line description.
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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema descriptions, which already explain bot_id, entity_id, entity_type, and client_slug. It neither improves nor degrades parameter clarity.
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 uses a specific verb ('Inicia' = launches/starts) and names the resource ('Salesbot') as well as the target scope (a specific Lead or Contact). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_salesbots, get_salesbot_by_id, and stop_salesbot, which retrieve or stop bots rather than start them.
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?
The description clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need to start a Salesbot for a particular Lead or Contact. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the verb 'Inicia' and sibling names make the context unambiguous. It lacks an explicit 'use when/use instead' statement, so it doesn't reach a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.