Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

Récupérer un dictionnaire BoondManager

boond_application_dictionary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get reference dictionaries (states, types, countries, currencies, languages) from BoondManager to translate integer IDs into readable labels before filtering searches.

Instructions

Récupère un dictionnaire de référence BoondManager (états, types, pays, devises, langues, outils, expertises, ...).

Quand : pour traduire un état ou un type BoondManager entre son ID entier et son libellé, avant de filtrer une recherche. Plutôt que : les ressources boond://dictionary/* pour les tables courantes (états, typeOf, pays, devises, langues) : même contenu par un resources/read, sans consommer un appel d'outil. Cet outil reste nécessaire pour les tables non publiées en ressource.

L'API expose un seul endpoint /application/dictionary qui renvoie tout — le serveur le cache (TTL 1h, configurable via BOOND_DICTIONARY_TTL_MS) et extrait un sous-arbre par chemin dotté.

Args:

  • dictionaryType (string): Chemin dans la réponse (relatif à data). Exemples :

    • "setting.state.{resource,candidate,contact,company,opportunity,project,invoice,order,positioning}" → états par entité

    • "setting.typeOf.{resource,contact,project}" → types par entité

    • "setting.action.{candidate,resource,opportunity,project,...}" → actions disponibles

    • "setting.tool" → outils / technos (Java, AWS...)

    • "setting.expertiseArea" → domaines d'expertise

    • "setting.experience" → niveaux d'expérience

    • "setting.languageSpoken" → langues parlées

    • "setting.activityArea" → secteurs d'activité

    • "setting.mobilityArea" → mobilités géographiques

    • "setting.currency" → devises

    • "setting.civility" → civilités

    • "country" → pays

    • "languages" → langues d'interface (fr, en, es)

Note : l'ancienne forme "states/resources" (slash) n'est pas valide — utilisez "setting.state.resource".

Returns : le sous-arbre demandé (souvent un tableau {id, value, …}), ou isError: true avec le chemin fautif s'il est introuvable.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dictionaryTypeYesType de dictionnaire (ex: typeOf/actions, typeOf/absences, states/candidates, states/resources, states/opportunities, states/projects, states/invoices, countries, currencies, languages...)

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. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already communicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: one endpoint returning everything, server-side caching with a configurable TTL, dotted-path subtree extraction, the invalid legacy slash form, and the isError response for unknown paths. It does not discuss auth or rate limits, but those are not central for this read-only dictionary lookup.

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?

The description is long but clearly structured with Quand/Plutôt que/endpoint/Args/Returns sections, and the extensive path examples are reference material rather than fluff. It could be slightly condensed, but no sentence is wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains when to use it, what the parameter means, what the response looks like, the error behavior, and important constraints. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

One parameter with 100% schema coverage, but the description adds the crucial semantics: dictionaryType is a path relative to data, with many concrete examples and an explicit correction that the schema-style slash form ('states/resources') is invalid in favor of dotted form ('setting.state.resource'). This goes well beyond the schema and prevents a common mistake.

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 opens with a precise verb and object ('Récupère un dictionnaire de référence BoondManager') and enumerates the dictionary contents (états, types, pays, devises...). It also distinguishes itself from reading the same data via the boond://dictionary/* resources, so an agent can tell this tool apart from the read-resource 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 'Quand' section gives an explicit trigger: translate a BoondManager state or type ID to its label before filtering a search. The 'Plutôt que' section names the alternative (resources/read on boond://dictionary/*) and states the condition for still using this tool (tables not published as resources).

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