retailcrm-mcp

tasks_list

Read-only

Retrieve a paginated list of follow-up tasks, filterable by completion status, assigned manager, or customer.

Instructions

List follow-up tasks/reminders, filterable by status/performer/customer. Returns {tasks[], pagination}.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "tasks_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number
`limit`	No	Results per page (max 100)
`filter_status`	No	Filter by completion status
`filter_customer`	No	Filter by customer name/contact (text match — RetailCRM v5 has no numeric customer-ID task filter)
`filter_performer_id`	No	Filter by assigned manager ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.0.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation; the description adds value by stating the return structure {tasks[], pagination}, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single sentence that packs the core purpose, filters, and return type without any redundancy or extra fluff.

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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, filters, and return shape. Combined with the readOnlyHint annotation, it provides sufficient context for safe invocation, though it could optionally mention pagination defaults (already in schema).

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

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter is already well described. The description merely paraphrases filter categories (status/performer/customer) without adding new meaning or clarifying the enum values beyond what the schema provides.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'follow-up tasks/reminders' and specifies filtering criteria. It distinguishes this from sibling task tools like tasks_edit and tasks_create by indicating it is for listing/reading.

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?

The description implies the tool is for read-only listing and gives filter context (status/performer/customer), which helps agents know when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing to tasks_create/edit for modifications.

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