Kommo Kiro MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

update_stage

Idempotent

Change a Kommo pipeline stage's name, sort order, or color by providing its pipeline_id and stage_id. Supply at least one field; returns the updated stage and clears stage/pipeline caches.

Instructions

Change a stage's name, sort order, or color. Only the provided fields are sent; supply at least one of name, sort, or color. Returns the updated stage. Safe to repeat. Clears the stage and pipeline caches. Get IDs from list_stages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	New stage name.
`sort`	No	New sort position; lower values appear first (e.g. 10, 20).
`color`	No	New hex color, e.g. #4CAF50, sent to Kommo as-is.
`stage_id`	Yes	Stage ID within that pipeline. Obtain it from list_stages.
`pipeline_id`	Yes	Kommo pipeline ID (integer). Obtain it from list_pipelines.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Stage ID.
`name`	No	Stage name.
`sort`	No	Sort order.
`type`	No	0 for regular stages, 1 for unsorted.
`color`	No	Hex color.
`account_id`	No	Kommo account ID.
`is_editable`	No	Whether the stage can be edited.
`pipeline_id`	No	Parent pipeline ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.3Oct 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The updated stage.",
+  "properties": {
+    "account_id": {
+      "description": "Kommo account ID.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "color": {
+      "description": "Hex color.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Stage ID.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "is_editable": {
+      "description": "Whether the stage can be edited.",
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Stage name.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "pipeline_id": {
+      "description": "Parent pipeline ID.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "sort": {
+      "description": "Sort order.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "0 for regular stages, 1 for unsorted.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / color / description

Added value: +"New hex color, e.g. #4CAF50, sent to Kommo as-is."

addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"New stage name."
```

addedInput schema / properties / pipeline_id / description

Added value: +"Kommo pipeline ID (integer). Obtain it from list_pipelines."

addedInput schema / properties / sort / description

Added value: +"New sort position; lower values appear first (e.g. 10, 20)."

addedInput schema / properties / stage_id / description

Added value: +"Stage ID within that pipeline. Obtain it from list_stages."

First observedv1.0.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'Safe to repeat' is largely redundant. It does add genuine behavior beyond the structured fields: the partial-update semantics ('only the provided fields are sent') and the side effect 'Clears the stage and pipeline caches'. It omits permission/auth requirements and failure behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Six short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint, with the ID-source hint last - no wasted padding overall. 'Safe to repeat' mildly duplicates the idempotentHint annotation, which is the only slack in an otherwise tight block.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With a full output schema, the return value needs no explanation, and the annotations carry the safety profile; the description covers the remaining essentials (partial update, cache invalidation, ID provenance). Only edge behavior - validation errors, whether additional stage fields exist, required permissions - is unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

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, but the description adds a real constraint the schema does not express: at least one of name, sort, or color must be supplied (only pipeline_id/stage_id are marked required). It also names the exact fields it operates on, reinforcing the schema. It adds no syntax beyond the schema's own param text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a stage's name, sort order, or color'), so the agent immediately knows this is an in-place mutation of an existing stage. It routes to list_stages for IDs, which implicitly separates it from create_stage. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with the create/delete siblings, so it is clear but not maximally differentiating.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a concrete invocation constraint ('Only the provided fields are sent; supply at least one of name, sort, or color') and the prerequisite source for IDs (list_stages). That is clear when-to-use context. It offers no when-not-to-use guidance or comparison against alternatives such as create_stage or update_pipeline, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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