Bitrix24 MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action ('Create a new company'). It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits like required authentication, potential side effects (e.g., data persistence), error handling, or response format, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words, making it highly efficient and front-loaded. It directly communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration, earning full marks for 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 creation tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., success/error responses, idempotency), usage context, and differentiation from siblings, making it insufficient for informed tool selection and invocation.

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?

The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, as schema description coverage is 100%. This meets the baseline for adequate but not exceptional, as the schema fully documents all 11 parameters and their purposes.

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 ('Create') and resource ('new company in Bitrix24 CRM'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'bitrix24_create_contact' or 'bitrix24_create_deal' beyond specifying the resource type, missing explicit distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'bitrix24_update_company' or other creation tools (e.g., for contacts or deals). It lacks context about prerequisites, such as required permissions or system states, leaving usage entirely implicit.

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