Skip to main content
Glama
fauguste

boondmanager-mcp-server

by fauguste
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Rechercher des feuilles de temps

boond_timesheets_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search monthly timesheets (CRA) across resources in BoondManager for a date range. Provide start and end month (YYYY-MM) to get matching results.

Instructions

Recherche des feuilles de temps (CRA mensuels) dans BoondManager.

Quand : pour balayer les CRA de plusieurs ressources sur une période. Plutôt que : boond_resources_timesheets quand on part d'une ressource précise, et boond_timesheets_get pour le détail jour par jour d'un CRA.

⚠️ startMonth et endMonth (format YYYY-MM) sont requis par l'API — passer YYYY-MM-DD ou les omettre renvoie un 422.

Args:

  • startMonth (string, requis): Mois de début YYYY-MM (ex: '2025-01')

  • endMonth (string, requis): Mois de fin YYYY-MM (ex: '2025-03')

  • keywords (string, optional): Mots-clés

  • page (number): Numéro de page (défaut: 1)

  • pageSize (number): Résultats par page (défaut: 30)

Returns: Liste des feuilles de temps correspondantes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoNuméro de page (max: 100)
endMonthYesMois de fin au format YYYY-MM (ex: '2025-03'). Requis.
keywordsNoMots-clés (préfixes 'TPS', 'COMP'...).
pageSizeNoNombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)
startMonthYesMois de début au format YYYY-MM (ex: '2025-01'). Requis.

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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior. The description adds a valuable API constraint: startMonth/endMonth must be YYYY-MM and wrong/missing values produce a 422. It also states the return type, though it could say a bit more about pagination/response shape.

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 front-loaded with purpose and then moves through usage, alternatives, a warning, and parameters in a logical order with no filler. It loses a point because the Args block largely duplicates what the input schema already provides.

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 read-only search tool with complete schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, parameter constraints, and return kind. The return line is somewhat thin, and since there is no output schema, a slightly richer description of the returned list would make it fully complete.

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%; every parameter already has required flags, regex patterns, defaults, bounds, and French descriptions. The description mostly restates those schema facts (format examples and defaults) rather than adding new semantics, so it earns the baseline 3.

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 specific verb + resource: searching monthly CRA timesheets in BoondManager. It also explicitly differentiates from `boond_resources_timesheets` (resource-centric) and `boond_timesheets_get` (day-by-day detail), so an agent can select it among many sibling tools.

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 names the exact scenario (scanning CRAs of multiple resources over a period) and the 'Plutôt que' section names two alternatives with the conditions that should route to them. This is explicit when/when-not guidance.

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