Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Rechercher des notifications

boond_notifications_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search BoondManager notifications by required category (activity, thread, or corporate), filter by read state and parent module type, and paginate results. Use field projection to limit output for large pages.

Instructions

Recherche des notifications dans BoondManager.

Plutôt que : boond_validations_search pour ce qui requiert réellement une action de validation — une notification n'est qu'un message.

⚠️ Le paramètre category est REQUIS par l'API (singulier, pas de tableau).

Returns: Liste des notifications 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)
stateNoFiltrer par état de lecture.
fieldsNoProjection : attributs à afficher par résultat (ex: ['title','updateDate']). Absent = résumé standard. Noms inconnus ignorés.
categoryYesCatégorie (requis): 'activity' (notifications d'activité), 'thread' (messages), 'corporate' (annonces).
pageSizeNoNombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)
parentTypeNoTypes de modules parents (ex: 'contract', 'global', 'project'...).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Previous value: -"Numéro de page (max: 100)"New value: +"Numéro de page (défaut: 1, max: 100)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput 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. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context: 'fields' is a client-side projection never sent to the API, and pagination limits are specified with behavior (refus beyond limits). It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement, a differentiator note, a required-parameter warning, return expectation, and two bullet points explaining key parameters. Each part earns its place without redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema, the description explains the return (list of notifications), clarifies the fields projection behavior, and gives pagination limits. Combined with the schema's complete parameter descriptions, an agent has sufficient information to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps like exact response format are acceptable given annotations and schema.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that 'category' is required (singular), that 'fields' is a projection side-MCP with unknown names ignored, and explains pagination defaults and rejection behavior—valuable context not in the 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 clearly states 'Recherche des notifications dans BoondManager', a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sister tool boond_validations_search by noting that validations require action, whereas notifications are just messages, giving an agent clear differentiability.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'Plutôt que : boond_validations_search pour ce qui requiert réellement une action de validation' tells when NOT to use this tool and points to the alternative. It also highlights the required 'category' parameter, giving a clear usage prerequisite.

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