Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

by fauguste
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Rechercher des actions

boond_actions_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search calls, emails, appointments, and notes across BoondManager entities. Filter by candidate, resource, contact, or company to review commercial or HR history with pagination and keyword search.

Instructions

Recherche des actions (appels, emails, RDV, notes) dans BoondManager avec filtres optionnels par candidat, ressource, contact ou société.

Quand : pour balayer l'historique commercial ou RH sur un périmètre, plusieurs entités confondues. Plutôt que : les onglets actions d'une entité connue (boond_candidates_actions, boond_companies_actions, boond_projects_actions…) : plus direct et sans filtre de périmètre à construire.

Args:

  • keywords (string, optional): Termes de recherche

  • candidateId, resourceId, contactId, companyId (string, optional): Filtrer par entité liée

  • page, pageSize: Pagination

Returns: Liste des actions correspondantes.

  • fields : projection côté MCP, jamais transmise à l'API — remplace le résumé par les seuls attributs listés (noms inconnus ignorés). À utiliser sur les grosses pages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoNuméro de page (max: 100)
fieldsNoProjection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.
keywordsNoMots-clés de recherche
pageSizeNoRésultats par page
companyIdNoFiltrer par ID société
contactIdNoFiltrer par ID contact
resourceIdNoFiltrer par ID ressource
candidateIdNoFiltrer par ID candidat

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Projection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  3. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds value by explaining the scope (multiple entities) and the 'fields' projection behavior ('projection côté MCP, jamais transmise à l'API'), which is non-obvious and important for the agent. It loses one point because the return behavior beyond 'Liste des actions correspondantes' is not detailed, which would be useful for a search tool.

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 compact, well-organized with 'Quand', 'Plutôt que', and 'Args' sections, and every sentence earns its place. The fields note is placed after the return description, which is fine as it's an advanced feature. No redundancy with schema.

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 read-only search tool with full schema coverage and clear sibling differentiation, the description is largely complete. It explains the fields projection quirk and pagination parameters are in the schema. Missing: no explicit mention of result format (beyond the plain 'Liste des actions correspondantes') and whether filters combine, but these are minor for a search tool with annotations covering safety. The output schema is absent, but for a list endpoint the description's brief return statement is acceptable.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to restate parameters. The description's only addition is the 'fields' projection note ('remplace le résumé par les seuls attributs listés'), which adds real value. However, it doesn't explain filter semantics (e.g., whether filters are ANDed), which the schema also leaves implicit. This is baseline 3 territory, with a slight bonus for the fields note balanced by minimal added filter semantics.

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 is explicit and specific: 'Recherche des actions (appels, emails, RDV, notes) dans BoondManager avec filtres optionnels par candidat, ressource, contact ou société.' It names the resource (actions), the domain (BoondManager), and the filter dimensions, which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like boond_candidates_actions or boond_actions_get. The distinction is further reinforced by the explicit 'Plutôt que' section naming an alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides clear 'Quand' and 'Plutôt que' guidance, explicitly stating to use this tool for sweeping commercial/HR history across multiple entities, and explaining why entity-specific action tabs are less direct. This is exemplary usage guidance that routes the agent to the correct tool in ambiguous multi-entity scenarios.

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