boondmanager-mcp-server

Créer une prestation/livraison

boond_deliveries_create

Create a delivery linked to a project and resource to make the resource billable. Returns the delivery ID required for expense notes.

Instructions

Crée une prestation (livraison) rattachée à un projet et à une ressource.

Quand : pour ouvrir la ligne de mission qui rendra la ressource facturable sur ce projet. Plutôt que : boond_projects_deliveries_groupments pour lister les prestations déjà en place sur le projet.

project et resource sont obligatoires et attendent des ID numériques.
L'ID de prestation retourné est celui qu'exigent les lignes de note de frais (boond_expenses_create).
Écriture non idempotente.

Returns : confirmation et fiche de la prestation créée, avec son ID dans structuredContent.id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Notes, mappées vers informationComments
`state`	No	État de la prestation : ID de `boond://dictionary/states/deliveries`
`title`	No	Titre de la prestation/livraison
`typeOf`	No	Type de prestation : ID de `boond://dictionary/typeOf/deliveries`
`endDate`	No	Date de fin (YYYY-MM-DD)
`quantity`	No	Nombre de jours / quantité
`projectId`	Yes	ID du projet
`startDate`	No	Date de début (YYYY-MM-DD)
`unitPrice`	No	Prix journalier HT
`resourceId`	Yes	ID de la ressource portée par la prestation
`averageDailyCost`	No	Coût journalier moyen
`forceAverageDailyPriceExcludingTax`	No	Forcer le prix journalier HT

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.

Changed12 schema fields changedv2.17.0Sep 26, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / averageDailyCost / description

Previous value: -"Cout journalier moyen"New value: +"Coût journalier moyen"

changedInput schema / properties / note / description

Previous value: -"Notes, mappees vers informationComments"New value: +"Notes, mappées vers informationComments"

removedInput schema / properties / projectId / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
addedInput schema / properties / projectId / pattern
```
Added value: +"^\\d+$"
```

changedInput schema / properties / quantity / description

Previous value: -"Nombre de jours / quantite"New value: +"Nombre de jours / quantité"

changedInput schema / properties / resourceId / description

Previous value: -"ID de la ressource portee par la prestation"New value: +"ID de la ressource portée par la prestation"

removedInput schema / properties / resourceId / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
addedInput schema / properties / resourceId / pattern
```
Added value: +"^\\d+$"
```

changedInput schema / properties / startDate / description

Previous value: -"Date de debut (YYYY-MM-DD)"New value: +"Date de début (YYYY-MM-DD)"

changedInput schema / properties / state / description

Previous value: -"Etat"New value: +"État de la prestation : ID de `boond://dictionary/states/deliveries`"

changedInput schema / properties / typeOf / description

Previous value: -"Type de prestation"New value: +"Type de prestation : ID de `boond://dictionary/typeOf/deliveries`"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Identifiant de l'entité créée/modifiée",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2Aug 14, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
Addedv2.8.0Jun 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The non-idempotent hint already appears in annotations (idempotentHint=false), so the description's 'Écriture non idempotente' adds no new signal. However, it does add genuine behavioral context by explaining the business effect (ouvre la ligne de mission) and the cross-tool dependency that the returned ID is required by boond_expenses_create. This goes beyond the annotations.

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 with distinct sections (purpose, when, alternative, bullet points, returns) and no filler. Every sentence contributes meaning: the required params, the cross-tool ID dependency, and the non-idempotency warning. Excellent front-loading of the core action.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description includes usage context, an alternative, required parameters, return location, and a cross-tool note, covering most operational needs. However, the parameter name mismatch creates a critical gap: an agent may be unable to invoke the tool correctly despite the rich context. This reduces overall completeness.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description did not need to explain parameters, but it actively misnames the required fields as `project` and `resource` while the actual parameter names are `projectId` and `resourceId`. This is a serious factual error that could cause an agent to pass non-existent parameters, undermining the otherwise complete schema.

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 opens with 'Crée une prestation (livraison) rattachée à un projet et à une ressource', a specific verb+resource statement that clearly separates it from sibling tools like boond_deliveries_update or boond_deliveries_delete. It further names boond_projects_deliveries_groupments as the listing alternative, reinforcing its distinct purpose.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (to open the mission line making the resource billable) and the 'Plutôt que' section names the exact alternative for listing existing prestations. This gives unambiguous selection criteria, exceptionally clear for an agent.

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

Deploy Server