boondmanager-mcp-server

Modifier un(e) candidat

boond_candidates_update

Idempotent

Update an existing candidate by ID, modifying only the fields you provide while leaving others unchanged. Use to edit candidate details like contact info, skills, or status.

Instructions

Met à jour un(e) candidat existant(e), identifié(e) par son ID.

Quand : pour modifier quelques champs d'un enregistrement déjà en base. Plutôt que : boond_candidates_create si l'enregistrement n'existe pas encore, ou boond_find pour résoudre un nom / un e-mail en ID.

Mise à jour partielle : seuls les champs fournis sont écrits, les autres sont laissés en place.
Attention aux champs de type tableau, qui sont remplacés et non fusionnés.
boond_rights_get dit si l'utilisateur a ce droit sur l'enregistrement avant d'essayer (un 403 évité).

Returns : confirmation et fiche mise à jour.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	ID du candidat à modifier
`city`	No	Ville
`note`	No	Notes
`state`	No	État du candidat
`title`	No	Titre / fonction
`email1`	No	Email principal
`phone1`	No	Téléphone
`country`	No	Pays
`lastName`	No	Nom
`firstName`	No	Prénom
`mainSkills`	No	Compétences principales

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	Identifiant de l'entité créée/modifiée
`type`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.17.0Sep 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
```
Added value: +"^\\d+$"
```

Changed1 schema field changedv2.15.0Sep 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / email1 / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"New value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"

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 changedv2.7.0Jun 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Identifiant de l'entité créée/modifiée",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv2.1.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses partial-update behavior, the fact that array fields are replaced rather than merged, and the rights-checking tip via boond_rights_get to avoid a 403. It also states the return value. These are meaningful behavioral details that the annotations alone do not provide.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the action, followed by usage conditions, behavioral caveats, and return information. Each sentence earns its place with no redundant 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?

For an update tool with 11 parameters, the description covers purpose, alternatives, partial-update behavior, array replacement semantics, prerequisite rights checking, and return value. Combined with the complete schema and output schema, nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 every parameter. The description adds general patch semantics ('seuls les champs fournis sont écrits'), but it does not add per-parameter detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Met à jour un(e) candidat existant(e), identifié(e) par son ID.' It clearly differentiates the tool from boond_candidates_create and boond_find by naming them explicitly and giving the condition for each alternative.

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 says to use this tool when modifying a few fields of an existing record, and the 'Plutôt que' section explicitly names boond_candidates_create for nonexistent records and boond_find for name/email resolution. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

Deploy Server