Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

by fauguste
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Modifier un(e) projet

boond_projects_update
Idempotent

Partially update an existing project by ID: only the fields you supply are written, leaving other data unchanged.

Instructions

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

Quand : pour modifier quelques champs d'un enregistrement déjà en base. Plutôt que : boond_projects_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 projet à modifier
nameNoNom du projet
noteNoNotes
stateNoÉtat du projet
typeOfNoType de projet (ID du dictionnaire setting.typeOf.project)
endDateNoDate de fin (YYYY-MM-DD)
startDateNoDate de début (YYYY-MM-DD)

Output Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.8.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / typeOf
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Type de projet (ID du dictionnaire setting.typeOf.project)",
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.7.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations: partial update semantics, array fields being replaced rather than merged, and what is returned. No contradiction with 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?

Four compact sentences with no filler: the core action, the usage condition, the critical partial-update warning, and the return value. Information is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 an update tool with one required ID, six optional fields, useful annotations, and an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: how to select it, what fields are affected, the array-replacement caveat, and the response shape. Nothing important is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, with every parameter documented in the input schema itself. The description does not add much per-parameter semantics, but it does clarify the update behavior (only provided fields are written), so a 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 action ('Met à jour'), the resource ('un(e) projet existant(e)'), and the identifier used ('son ID'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the create sibling, so an agent can tell what this tool is for without inspecting schema.

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?

It provides an explicit 'Quand' condition (modify a few fields of an existing record) and an explicit alternative ('Plutôt que : boond_projects_create si l'enregistrement n'existe pas encore'). This gives clear selection guidance versus its most relevant sibling.

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