boondmanager-mcp-server

Rechercher des rôles

boond_roles_search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search BoondManager roles by keywords and pagination to find role IDs from names or list existing roles. Returns one-line summaries with ID and label.

Instructions

Liste et recherche les rôles de BoondManager, par mots-clés et pagination.

Quand : pour retrouver l'ID d'un(e) rôle à partir de son nom, ou pour énumérer les rôles existant(e)s. Plutôt que : boond_roles_get si l'ID est déjà connu — la recherche ne renvoie qu'un résumé d'une ligne par rôle.

Returns : page de résumés (ID + libellé principal), plus structuredContent.total = nombre total côté BoondManager. Lecture seule.

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.
Pagination : pageSize 1–500 (défaut 30), page 1–100 — au-delà : refus, affiner les filtres.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Numéro de page (défaut: 1, max: 100)
`fields`	No	Projection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.
`keywords`	No	Mots-clés de recherche (nom, email, compétences...)
`pageSize`	No	Nombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	Yes	Nombre d'éléments retournés sur cette page
`items`	Yes
`total`	No	Nombre total de résultats côté BoondManager

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.2Aug 14, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

Changed1 schema field changedv2.9.0Aug 3, 2026

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"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv2.7.0Jun 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Nombre d'éléments retournés sur cette page",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "attributes": {
+            "additionalProperties": {},
+            "description": "Attributs projetés (présent si `fields` est fourni)",
+            "propertyNames": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "summary": {
+            "description": "Résumé standard (absent si `fields` est fourni)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Nombre total de résultats côté BoondManager",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv2.1.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it returns a page of summaries (ID + main label), exposes structuredContent.total, and explains that the fields parameter is a client-side projection never sent to the API. It also discloses pagination limits (pageSize 1–500, page 1–100) and that exceeding them causes refusal. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 and well-structured with clear sections (Quand, Plutôt que, Returns, fields, Pagination). Every sentence carries information: use case, sibling differentiation, return shape, read-only confirmation, projection semantics, and pagination constraints. No filler.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are already documented. The description covers the key operational details an agent needs: when to use it, what it returns, how fields projection behaves, and pagination limits. For a read-only search tool with 4 optional parameters, this is complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the fields parameter is a client-side projection that replaces the summary and ignores unknown names, and by clarifying pagination bounds and the default pageSize. It also gives an example of fields usage. This is meaningful semantic enrichment beyond the schema.

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 lists and searches BoondManager roles by keywords and pagination, with the specific use case of finding a role ID from its name. It explicitly contrasts with boond_roles_get, distinguishing the search tool from the direct-get sibling.

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 it (to find a role ID from its name, or enumerate existing roles) and when not to (use boond_roles_get if the ID is already known), noting the search only returns a one-line summary per role. This is clear routing guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server