Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

by fauguste
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Livraisons et groupements d'un projet

boond_projects_deliveries_groupments
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a project's deliveries and their groupments by ID, returning only the billing lines needed for expense reports. Use this focused read-only action instead of loading the full project record.

Instructions

Récupère les livraisons et leurs groupements (lignes de mission facturables du projet) d'un(e) projet, par son ID.

Quand : pour ne charger que cette section, sans le reste de la fiche. Plutôt que : boond_projects_get pour la fiche de base, ou boond_projects_search si l'ID est inconnu.

Returns : Liste des livraisons du projet. Les ID de livraison qui s'y trouvent sont ceux qu'exige une ligne de note de frais. Lecture seule.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesIdentifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.7.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager"New value: +"Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
  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?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by noting the returned delivery IDs are those required for an expense report line, and explicitly states 'Lecture seule'. It doesn't contradict annotations.

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 concise and well-structured, with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and return value context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It explains the return value's purpose (delivery IDs for expense report lines) and the read-only nature. Minor gap: it doesn't describe the exact structure of the returned groupings, but this is acceptable given no output schema and the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the single 'id' parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds that the ID is the project's ID, which is helpful but not essential beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves deliveries and their groupings for a project by ID, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming boond_projects_get and boond_projects_search as alternatives, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool ('pour ne charger que cette section, sans le reste de la fiche') and contrasts it with boond_projects_get for the base record and boond_projects_search when the ID is unknown. This provides clear usage guidance and alternatives.

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