Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Détails d'un(e) société

boond_companies_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a company's complete record by numeric ID to access attributes missing from search summaries, optionally targeting a specific tab.

Instructions

Récupère la fiche complète d'un(e) société par son ID numérique.

Quand : après un boond_companies_search, pour obtenir les attributs qui n'apparaissent pas dans le résumé de liste. Plutôt que : boond_companies_search si l'ID n'est pas connu (cet outil n'accepte pas de nom), ou boond_find pour résoudre un nom / un e-mail en ID.

  • tab cible un onglet précis (information, technical-data, administrative, actions…) ; sans tab, seule la fiche de base est renvoyée, pas la réunion des onglets.

  • Un ID inconnu remonte l'erreur BoondManager telle quelle — l'ID doit venir de boond_companies_search, jamais d'une supposition.

Returns : JSON de l'entité (attributs + relations) tel que renvoyé par l'API. Lecture seule.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesIdentifiant unique de l'entité (numérique)
tabNoOnglet spécifique à récupérer (information, technical, financial, actions, contracts, documents)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.7.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Identifiant unique de l'entité"New value: +"Identifiant unique de l'entité (numérique)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
    • addedInput schema / properties / tab / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z-]*$"
  3. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds valuable context: it clarifies that without a 'tab' parameter only the base sheet is returned (not the union of tabs), discloses that an unknown ID surfaces the raw BoondManager error, and states the return format (JSON). These go beyond existing annotations and provide actionable behavior.

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: a core sentence, then a 'Quand' section, a 'Plutôt que' section, and bullet points for edge cases. Every sentence carries essential information, and the purpose is front-loaded. No redundancy or 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?

Given the tool is a simple GET-by-ID with two parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete for correct invocation. It covers when to use, what it returns, how the tab parameter behaves, and error handling. An agent can call it correctly without any missing information.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning for 'tab' (it targets a specific tab, and default behavior) and for 'id' (it must come from search, never guessed), which enhances the agent's understanding beyond the schema. This justifies a score above baseline, though not the full 5 since the schema was already thorough.

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 ('Récupère'), a resource ('la fiche complète d'un(e) société'), and a key parameter ('par son ID numérique'). It clearly distinguishes from boond_companies_search (returns a listing summary) and boond_find (resolves a name/email to an ID), making sibling differentiation explicit.

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 description explicitly states when to use it ('après un boond_companies_search') and when not to use it, naming alternatives and their conditions. It also warns that this tool does not accept a name and that boond_find is the alternative for name/email resolution, leaving no ambiguity.

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