Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

by fauguste
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Modifier un(e) contact

boond_contacts_update
Idempotent

Update a specific contact in BoondManager by ID, modifying only the fields you provide while leaving others unchanged.

Instructions

Met à jour un(e) contact existant(e), identifié(e) par son ID.

Quand : pour modifier quelques champs d'un enregistrement déjà en base. Plutôt que : boond_contacts_create si l'enregistrement n'existe pas encore.

  • Mise à jour partielle : seuls les champs fournis sont écrits, les autres sont laissés en place.

  • Attention aux champs de type tableau, qui sont remplacés et non fusionnés.

Returns : confirmation et fiche mise à jour.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID du contact à modifier
cityNoVille
noteNoNotes
titleNoTitre / fonction
email1NoEmail
phone1NoTéléphone
lastNameNoNom
firstNameNoPrénom

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoIdentifiant de l'entité créée/modifiée
typeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.15.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / email1 / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"New value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.7.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Identifiant de l'entité créée/modifiée",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  4. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already include idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description goes beyond annotations by clarifying partial update behavior (only provided fields are written) and the critical replacement of array fields. No contradiction with hints. Could have mentioned authorization or response format, but what's there is useful.

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 well-structured with bullet points and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. It is concise but includes necessary warnings. Slight redundancy in restating 'Quand' and 'Plutôt que' but still earns high marks.

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 moderate complexity update tool with a required ID and optional field updates, the description reasonably covers key aspects: identification by ID, partial update, array replacement, and indicates a return confirmation. Output schema exists, so no need to detail return values. Could have mentioned validation or field constraints beyond schema, but it is complete enough.

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 places a 'ID du contact à modifier' description for 'id' and provides French descriptions for all other fields (Ville, Notes, etc.). The description adds no additional semantic beyond the schema—doesn't specify format or relationship between fields (e.g., lastName and firstName). With full schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already carries the meaning.

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 clearly states the tool updates an existing contact identified by ID IA, fixing scope and partial update semantics. It distinguishes from create by referencing the sibling boond_contacts_create.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (modify fields of existing record) and when not to (use create if record doesn't exist). Names the alternative tool directly. Also warns about table fields being replaced, adding crucial usage nuance.

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