Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Mettre à jour le dossier technique d'un candidat

boond_candidates_technical_data_update
Idempotent

Update a candidate's technical record: skills, tools, languages, profiles, sectors, training, diplomas, and experience. Merge new data without overwriting existing entries, or replace fields entirely.

Instructions

Met à jour le dossier technique (DT) d'un candidat : compétences, outils, langues, profils (activityAreas), secteurs (expertiseAreas), formation, diplômes, expérience, résumé.

Quand : pour coder le dossier technique d'un candidat (profils, secteurs, outils, langues, expérience, formation). Plutôt que : boond_candidates_update pour l'onglet Information (coordonnées, disponibilité, mobilité, évaluation) ; boond_resources_technical_data_update pour un collaborateur interne.

Mode 'merge' (défaut, recommandé pour automation) — enrichit sans rien écraser : • skills (CSV) : concatène les compétences absentes • tools / languages : ajoute les entrées dont la clé (slug outil / langue) est nouvelle, conserve le niveau existant pour les autres • expertiseAreas, activityAreas, diplomas : ajoute les items absents • title, summary, training, experience : remplis UNIQUEMENT si actuellement vides

Mode 'replace' — remplace intégralement chaque champ fourni. Les champs non passés ne sont pas touchés.

⚠️ experience, training, expertiseAreas, activityAreas et tools prennent des IDs de dictionnaire (setting.experience, setting.training, setting.expertiseArea, setting.activityArea, setting.tool), jamais des libellés.

Returns : confirmation, liste des champs envoyés mais non retrouvés dans la réponse de l'API (écriture ignorée par Boond), puis le DT mis à jour.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID du candidat dont le dossier technique est mis à jour.
modeNo'merge' (défaut) enrichit le DT sans rien écraser. 'replace' remplace intégralement chaque champ fourni.merge
titleNoTitre / poste.
toolsNoOutils maîtrisés avec niveau (1-4).
skillsNoCompétences libres, séparées par virgule.
summaryNoRésumé / synthèse du parcours (Profile Summary).
diplomasNoDiplômes (texte libre, ex: '2021 - Ingénieur Civil - UCLouvain').
trainingNoNiveau de formation : ID du dictionnaire `setting.training`.
languagesNoLangues parlées avec niveau.
experienceNoTranche d'expérience : ID numérique du dictionnaire `setting.experience`.
activityAreasNoSecteurs / profils : IDs du dictionnaire `setting.activityArea` (options des groupes).
expertiseAreasNoDomaines d'expertise : IDs du dictionnaire `setting.expertiseArea`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.18.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, but the description goes further by detailing the merge-vs-replace mutation semantics per field group (what gets concatenated, what gets added, what is filled only when empty) and the dictionary-ID requirement. That is substantial behavioral disclosure beyond the structured hints.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage routing, then mode semantics and the ID warning, all cleanly bulleted. It is dense but each section earns its place; only slightly verbose for a tool with 12 parameters.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining the return payload (confirmation, unmatched fields ignored by the API, updated DT). Combined with the mode semantics and ID warnings, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly, though the exact response shape remains prose-only.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning the schema lacks: the merge/replace behavior of each field family and the requirement that experience/training/expertiseAreas/activityAreas/tools take dictionary IDs (setting.*) rather than labels. This directly prevents a common invocation error.

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?

States a specific verb (met à jour) plus a precisely scoped resource (dossier technique d'un candidat) and enumerates the fields touched. It explicitly distinguishes itself from boond_candidates_update (Information tab) and boond_resources_technical_data_update (internal collaborator), so an agent can route correctly without opening a 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?

Contains explicit 'Quand' and 'Plutôt que' sections naming the exact alternatives to use instead, plus a recommendation ('mode merge recommandé pour automation'). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternatives are all stated.

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