Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Rechercher des notes de frais

boond_expenses_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search expense reports in BoondManager by resource, project, and date range. Use before creating a new expense report to avoid duplicate entries for the same resource and month.

Instructions

Recherche des notes de frais dans BoondManager avec filtres par ressource, projet et période.

Quand : avant toute création : l'API ne déduplique pas, deux notes de frais peuvent coexister sur le même couple (ressource, mois). Plutôt que : boond_expenses_get pour le détail des lignes d'une note de frais identifiée.

resourceId / projectId sont convertis en références keywords (COMP / PRJ) : l'API n'a pas de paramètre dédié.

Returns: Liste des notes de frais correspondantes.

  • fields : projection côté MCP, jamais transmise à l'API — remplace le résumé par les seuls attributs listés (noms inconnus ignorés). À utiliser sur les grosses pages.

  • Pagination : pageSize 1–500 (défaut 30), page 1–100 — au-delà : refus, affiner les filtres.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoNuméro de page (défaut: 1, max: 100)
fieldsNoProjection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.
endDateNoDate de fin (YYYY-MM-DD)
keywordsNoMots-clés de recherche
pageSizeNoNombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)
projectIdNoFiltrer par ID projet (référence keywords PRJ<id>)
startDateNoDate de début (YYYY-MM-DD)
resourceIdNoFiltrer par ID ressource (référence keywords COMP<id>)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNombre d'éléments retournés sur cette page
itemsYes
totalNoNombre total de résultats côté BoondManager

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Previous value: -"Numéro de page (max: 100)"New value: +"Numéro de page (défaut: 1, max: 100)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / pageSize / description
      Previous value: -"Résultats par page"New value: +"Nombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Filtrer par ID projet"New value: +"Filtrer par ID projet (référence keywords PRJ<id>)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectId / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / resourceId / description
      Previous value: -"Filtrer par ID ressource"New value: +"Filtrer par ID ressource (référence keywords COMP<id>)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / resourceId / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Projection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv2.7.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Nombre d'éléments retournés sur cette page",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "attributes": {
+            "additionalProperties": {},
+            "description": "Attributs projetés (présent si `fields` est fourni)",
+            "propertyNames": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "summary": {
+            "description": "Résumé standard (absent si `fields` est fourni)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Nombre total de résultats côté BoondManager",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  5. 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 provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: the API does not deduplicate, resourceId/projectId are converted to COMP<id>/PRJ<id> keywords, and fields is a client-side projection never sent to the API. It also documents hard pagination limits and that exceeding them yields a refusal rather than a fallback.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear section labels and bullets, and nearly every sentence adds value. The only minor redundancy is the 'Returns: Liste des notes de frais correspondantes' sentence, which mostly repeats the opening and is already covered by the output schema.

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 a search tool with eight optional parameters, the description covers all important operational context: when to use it, which sibling to prefer for detail lines, API-specific parameter transformations, pagination constraints, and client-side projection behavior. With an output schema present, nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description goes beyond the schema by explaining the keyword conversion for resourceId/projectId, the local-only nature of fields, and the exact acceptable ranges for page/pageSize. This gives an agent enough semantic context to use the parameters correctly without guessing.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Recherche des notes de frais dans BoondManager' with filters by resource, project, and period. It also distinguishes itself from boond_expenses_get, which handles line details of an already-identified expense note.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool: 'avant toute création', because the API does not deduplicate and two notes can coexist for the same resource/month. It also names the alternative boond_expenses_get and explains the difference in purpose, leaving no ambiguity about selection.

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