Bitrix24 MCP Server

Does 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 the tool retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't cover aspects like authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., invalid ID), rate limits, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 that front-loads the core purpose ('Retrieve lead information by ID') with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, 100% schema coverage) but lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like error cases or response structure, which are crucial for an agent to use it correctly. For a retrieval tool with no structured output info, more context is needed.

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 minimal value beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage. It mentions 'by ID', aligning with the schema's 'id' parameter, but doesn't provide additional context such as ID format or examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the description doesn't compensate with extra semantic details.

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 'Retrieve lead information by ID' clearly states the action (retrieve) and resource (lead information), with the specific mechanism (by ID) for identification. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'bitrix24_get_latest_leads' or 'bitrix24_get_leads_from_date_range' by focusing on individual retrieval rather than listing or filtering, though it doesn't explicitly name these alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage when you have a specific lead ID, but it doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid ID), exclusions (e.g., not for bulk retrieval), or name sibling tools like 'bitrix24_get_latest_leads' for different scenarios.

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