BocaRoss

Lire la fiche d’un professionnel

fiche_pro

Read-onlyIdempotent

Donne le détail d’un professionnel BocaRoss à partir de son identifiant (le champ « slug » rendu par chercher_pros, ou la fin de l’URL bocaross.fr/pro/…) : coordonnées, horaires des sept jours, prestations avec prix quand ils sont publiés, équipements, description, photos, comment prendre rendez-vous, et pour un centre de contrôle technique ses tarifs déclarés à la DGCCRF ou affichés par son réseau. À utiliser quand l’utilisateur veut en savoir plus sur un professionnel précis ou le contacter.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	L’identifiant de la fiche, ex. « gmr-auto », ou son URL complète.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`nom`	No
`url`	No	La fiche bocaross.fr du professionnel.
`slug`	No
`photo`	No
`metier`	No
`photos`	No
`adresse`	No
`commune`	No
`metiers`	No
`nb_avis`	No
`accroche`	No
`horaires`	No
`site_web`	No
`telephone`	No
`specialite`	No
`code_postal`	No
`description`	No
`distance_km`	No
`equipements`	No
`note_google`	No
`prestations`	No
`rendez_vous`	No
`prix_publies`	No
`certifie_bocaross`	No	Le professionnel gère sa page sur BocaRoss ; il passe devant les autres sur les listes où il figure.
`ouvert_maintenant`	No
`gestes_commerciaux`	No
`horaires_aujourdhui`	No
`se_deplace_jusqu_a_km`	No
`tarifs_controle_technique`	No	Pour un centre de contrôle technique : ses tarifs déclarés à la DGCCRF (prix.conso.gouv.fr), sinon ceux affichés par son réseau, avec la source et la date. À confirmer auprès du centre.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 21, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / tarifs_controle_technique

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour un centre de contrôle technique : ses tarifs déclarés à la DGCCRF (prix.conso.gouv.fr), sinon ceux affichés par son réseau, avec la source et la date. À confirmer auprès du centre.",
+  "properties": {
+    "a_partir_de": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "contre_visite": {
+      "properties": {
+        "max": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "min": {
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "date": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "prix": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "energies": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "prix": {
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds content-level behavior beyond that: it discloses that prices appear only « quand ils sont publiés » and that vehicle-inspection centres expose DGCCRF-declared or network-displayed tariffs — useful caveats an agent would otherwise not anticipate. No mention of invalid-slug 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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the payload enumeration and a single usage sentence. The midsection is a long comma-list that could be trimmed, but every element adds selection value and there is no filler.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't document return values, yet it summarizes them adequately for tool selection, and it names the input source and the use case. Only minor gaps remain (behavior on unknown slug, no explicit alternative when the professional is not yet identified).

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?

Single required param with 100% schema coverage, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by stating where the value comes from — « le champ « slug » rendu par chercher_pros, ou la fin de l’URL bocaross.fr/pro/… » — which tells the agent how to obtain and derive it, not just what format it takes.

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?

Specific verb+resource: reads the detail record of a BocaRoss professional from its slug. It enumerates the concrete payload (coordonnées, horaires sur sept jours, prestations avec prix, équipements, photos, prise de rendez-vous, tarifs DGCCRF pour un centre de contrôle technique), which clearly separates it from the sibling search tool chercher_pros.

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?

Explicit trigger given: « À utiliser quand l’utilisateur veut en savoir plus sur un professionnel précis ou le contacter. » It also routes the agent to chercher_pros as the source of the slug. There is no explicit when-not clause (e.g. what to do if the slug is unknown), 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.

All BocaRoss tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?