Skip to main content
Glama
mikkmihkel

BambooHR MCP Server

by mikkmihkel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get employee

bamboohr_get_employee
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch employee field values such as job title, hire date, and custom fields while refusing sensitive data; omit employeeId for your own record.

Instructions

Read one employee's field values: standard fields (hire date, job title, supervisor, status, work contact details) and custom fields (e.g. shoe size). Omit employeeId to read the API key owner's own record. Omit fields for a sensible default set. Fields outside the allow-list — pay, bank, national id, date of birth, gender, home contact details — are refused and nothing is returned; ask for other fields instead. missingFields lists requested fields that came back empty or that the key may not see.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoFields to read; only allow-listed and custom fields are permitted. Default: name, job, department, hire date, status, work contact.
employeeIdNoInternal employee id from bamboohr_list_employees. Omit or 0 for yourself.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv4.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / description
      Previous value: -"Fields to read. Default: name, job, department, hire date, status, contact."New value: +"Fields to read; only allow-listed and custom fields are permitted. Default: name, job, department, hire date, status, work contact."
  2. First observedv3.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds critical behavioral details: the allow-list restriction with specific refused fields (pay, bank, national id, etc.), the consequence of 'nothing is returned' for those, and the missingFields response field. It also clarifies the omission semantics for employeeId. These go well beyond the annotations and significantly aid correct invocation.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second covers parameter omission defaults, and the third explains restrictions and the missingFields output. It is front-loaded with the most important info and every sentence earns its place.

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 a two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers what the tool does, how to invoke it (including defaults), what fields are forbidden, and what to expect in the response (missingFields). No critical information an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial meaning: for 'fields' it defines the default set and the allow-list boundary, and for 'employeeId' it explains the omission behavior (self) and the source of the id (bamboohr_list_employees). This enriches both parameters beyond the bare schema descriptions, which only mention type and basic intent.

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's action ('Read one employee's field values') and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like bamboohr_list_employees (which lists employees) or bamboohr_employee_report (which likely generates reports). It also specifies the scope of fields (standard and custom), making the 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 Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives usage tips (omit employeeId for self, omit fields for defaults) but never addresses when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools or conditions for using a different one, leaving the agent to infer the selection criteria. The absence of any exclusion guidance is a notable gap.

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