Портал: воронки, стадии, сотрудники

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations by disclosing a 10-minute result cache, the required BITRIX24_WEBHOOK_URL credential with its crm/task/user scopes, and an automatically enforced 2 requests/second rate limit. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before invoking.

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?

Information density is high and front-loaded: returned shape first, then call-ordering rationale, then caching, credentials, and rate limits. It is a single dense paragraph, slightly long, but nearly every clause carries distinct operational value.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully sketches the return shape (users id/name/email/active; categories id/name/is_default; stages C1:NEW-style ids, name, open/won/lost semantics) and covers prerequisites, caching, and rate limiting. Nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the schema is empty and complete. Baseline 4 applies, with no param-level detail needed or missing.

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 states a specific resource — the Bitrix24 portal reference directory — and enumerates exactly what it returns: users, deal funnel categories, and stages with their id formats. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like b24_search_deals or b24_get_deal, which consume rather than supply these ids.

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?

Explicitly says to call this first in a conversation and names the specific downstream tools whose filters depend on its ids (b24_search_deals, b24_tasks, b24_pipeline_report, b24_create_deal, b24_update_deal). The when-to-use condition and the reason are both given.

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