Rillsoft Project MCP server

Official

by rillsoft

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

List absences

rillsoft_resource_absence_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve holiday, sickness, and other absences for a person or team. Read-only; does not modify the resource pool.

Instructions

Reads the absences of a person or a team: holiday, sickness and other time away. The pool is never changed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	id; with employee either the id of the person or that of one of their qualification rows. Give exactly one of 'id' and 'code'
`to`	No	only absences up to this day (DD.MM.YYYY)
`code`	No	code; a code belonging to several people makes the call fail
`from`	No	only absences from this day on (DD.MM.YYYY)
`type`	No	resource type; employee by default	employee
`absenceType`	No	only absences carrying this one-letter type code, as stored in the resource pool. The codes are German initials, not English ones: 'U' for Urlaub (vacation) and 'K' for Krankheit (sick leave) are the common pair, and a pool may define further letters. Leave it out for every type. An unknown letter is not an error - it simply matches nothing, so check rillsoft_resource_absence_list without the filter first
`includeTeams`	No	true = report the absences of the teams the person works in as well

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	id of the person or team
`name`	Yes	name of the person or team
`type`	Yes	resource type
`teams`	No	absences of the teams of the person; only with includeTeams:true
`absences`	Yes	own absences within the queried period

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv10.0.626Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and 'The pool is never changed' largely restates that safety profile rather than extending it. It adds no auth requirements, rate limits, or scoping caveats beyond what the annotations cover, so it is adequate but not additive.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose front-loaded, no filler. Every clause carries information about scope or effect.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the annotations plus 100%-covered schema carry the parameter and safety detail. The description is complete for correct invocation, with only routing against the sync sibling left implicit.

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%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters in detail, including the id/code mutual exclusion and the German one-letter absence codes. The description adds only the loose mapping of 'person or a team' to the resource type, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Reads the absences of a person or a team') and enumerates the content (holiday, sickness, other time away), so an agent understands exactly what is returned. It does not explicitly name or distinguish itself from the nearby sibling rillsoft_resource_absence_sync, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no alternative named. The only routing hint ('check ... without the filter first') lives in the absenceType schema description rather than the tool description, so the description itself offers essentially no usage guidance.

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

Deploy Server