Skip to main content
Glama
vivernet

Chatwoot MCP Server

by vivernet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Chatwoot Conversations

chatwoot_list_conversations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve and filter Chatwoot conversations by status, assignee, or inbox, with pagination for large result sets.

Instructions

List conversations from a Chatwoot account with filtering options.

This tool retrieves conversations from Chatwoot, allowing you to filter by status, assignee, and inbox. Supports pagination for large result sets.

Args:

  • account_id (number): The numeric ID of the Chatwoot account (required)

  • page (number): Page number for pagination, starts at 1 (default: 1)

  • status (string): Filter by conversation status - "open", "resolved", "pending", "snoozed", or "all" (default: "open")

  • assignee_type (string): Filter by assignee - "me", "unassigned", or "all" (optional)

  • inbox_id (number): Filter by specific inbox ID (optional)

  • response_format (string): Output format - "markdown" or "json" (default: "markdown")

Returns: A list of conversations with details including:

  • Conversation ID, status, and inbox

  • Contact information (name, email)

  • Assignee details

  • Message count and unread count

  • Last activity timestamp

Examples:

  • List all open conversations: { account_id: 1, status: "open" }

  • List unassigned conversations: { account_id: 1, assignee_type: "unassigned" }

  • List conversations in specific inbox: { account_id: 1, inbox_id: 5 }

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number for pagination (starts at 1)
statusNoFilter conversations by statusopen
inbox_idNoFilter conversations by inbox ID
account_idYesThe numeric ID of the account
assignee_typeNoFilter by assignee type
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for human-readable or 'json' for machine-readablemarkdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral detail beyond that: the default status filter is 'open' (easy to miss and materially affects results), pagination is supported, and the returned fields are enumerated. It does not mention page size or total-count behavior, which keeps it at 4.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then Args/Returns/Examples in a predictable structure. The Args section duplicates every field already fully described in the schema, which is avoidable bloat, but the Returns and Examples sections earn their space.

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 no output schema, the description steps in with a useful summary of returned fields (ID, status, inbox, contact, assignee, counts, timestamp). Pagination metadata and page size are the remaining unknowns, but nothing an agent needs 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.

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% with enums on status, assignee_type and response_format, so the schema already carries all parameter semantics. The Args block largely restates the schema, adding only example value combinations, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List conversations from a Chatwoot account') with the scope of filtering options. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like chatwoot_get_conversation and chatwoot_list_messages by resource, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 filtering narrative plus three concrete examples ('List unassigned conversations', 'List conversations in specific inbox') give clear context for when to use it. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance or contrast with chatwoot_get_conversation, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools