Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir

Supprimer un positionnement

boond_positionings_delete
Destructive

Permanently delete a positioning record in BoondManager after verifying its ID. Irreversible action; confirm the correct record to avoid data loss.

Instructions

Supprime définitivement un(e) positionnement de BoondManager.

Quand : uniquement sur demande explicite de l'utilisateur, et après avoir vérifié l'ID avec boond_positionings_get. Plutôt que : boond_positionings_update pour désactiver ou changer l'état d'un enregistrement sans le détruire — c'est presque toujours l'intention réelle.

  • boond_rights_get dit si l'utilisateur a ce droit sur l'enregistrement avant d'essayer (un 403 évité).

  • ⚠️ Irréversible, sans corbeille côté API.

  • Si le client MCP annonce la capacité elicitation, une confirmation est demandée à l'utilisateur final et un refus annule l'appel (structuredContent.deleted: false + reason) ; sinon la suppression part directement.

Returns : { id, deleted, reason? } — vérifier deleted, qui vaut false en cas de refus utilisateur.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesIdentifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
reasonNoPrésent quand la suppression n'a pas eu lieu (ex: refus utilisateur)
deletedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.7.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager"New value: +"Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "deleted": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "id": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "reason": {
      +      "description": "Présent quand la suppression n'a pas eu lieu (ex: refus utilisateur)",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "id",
      +    "deleted"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint true, but the description adds irreversibility, no trash on the API side, the confirmation flow when the MCP client supports elicitation, and the resulting deleted:false + reason payload. This is crucial behavioral context beyond 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?

Well-structured with bullet points and sections. Purpose and usage are front-loaded, every sentence adds value: when, alternative, rights check, irreversibility, confirmation behavior, and return format. No redundancy.

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?

Comprehensive: covers prerequisites (ID verification, rights check), alternatives, side effects (irreversible, no trash), cancellation behavior, and return format. With the output schema present, nothing an agent needs to call correctly is missing.

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 already documents id with pattern and description, and coverage is 100%. The description reinforces verifying the ID before deletion, but doesn't add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema. 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?

States the specific action: permanently deletes a BoondManager positioning. Clearly differentiates from update by saying 'Plutôt que : boond_positionings_update pour désactiver ou changer l'état d'un enregistrement sans le détruire', which names the sibling and the key distinction.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: only on explicit user request and after verifying the ID with boond_positionings_get. Names the alternative (boond_positionings_update) and explains why update is usually the real intent. Also mentions checking rights via boond_rights_get to avoid 403.

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