Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Rechercher des factures fournisseur

boond_provider_invoices_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search and list provider invoices with filters for supplier, status, or period. Retrieve summaries of purchase invoices (reference, date, amounts) with pagination.

Instructions

Liste et recherche les factures fournisseur (factures reçues des prestataires).

Quand : pour suivre les factures d'achat, par fournisseur, état ou période. Plutôt que : boond_invoices_search pour les factures de vente adressées aux clients — sens opposé, endpoint distinct.

Returns : page de résumés de factures fournisseur (référence, date, montants). Lecture seule.

  • 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.
keywordsNoMots-clés de recherche
pageSizeNoNombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)
companyIdNoFiltrer par ID société fournisseur (référence keywords CSOC<id>)
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. Changed8 schema fields changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / companyId / description
      Previous value: -"Filtrer par ID societe fournisseur"New value: +"Filtrer par ID société fournisseur (référence keywords CSOC<id>)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / companyId / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / keywords / description
      Previous value: -"Mots-cles de recherche"New value: +"Mots-clés de recherche"
    • changedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Previous value: -"Numero de page (max: 100)"New value: +"Numéro de page (défaut: 1, max: 100)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / pageSize / description
      Previous value: -"Resultats par page"New value: +"Nombre de résultats par page (max: 500, défaut: 30)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / resourceId / description
      Previous value: -"Filtrer par ID ressource via mot-cle COMP<id>"New value: +"Filtrer par ID ressource (référence keywords COMP<id>)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / resourceId / pattern
      Added value: +"^\\d+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "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"
+}
  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. Changed5 schema fields changedv2.8.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / companyId / description
      Previous value: -"Filtrer par ID société fournisseur"New value: +"Filtrer par ID societe fournisseur"
    • changedInput schema / properties / keywords / description
      Previous value: -"Mots-clés de recherche"New value: +"Mots-cles de recherche"
    • changedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Previous value: -"Numéro de page (max: 100)"New value: +"Numero de page (max: 100)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / pageSize / description
      Previous value: -"Résultats par page"New value: +"Resultats par page"
    • addedInput schema / properties / resourceId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filtrer par ID ressource via mot-cle COMP<id>",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  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 declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful operational details: it returns a page of summaries, the fields parameter is an MCP-side projection never sent to the API, unknown field names are ignored, and pagination beyond limits is refused. This goes well beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 compact, well-structured with clear sections, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: the when/alternative guidance, return summary, projection behavior, and pagination limits are all useful and concise.

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 annotations cover safety and idempotency, and an output schema exists, the description covers the essential operational context: purpose, alternative tool, return shape, projection semantics, and pagination constraints. No critical information needed to call the tool correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that fields is a client-side projection, not an API parameter, and by clarifying pagination boundaries and refusal behavior. It does not add much for companyId/resourceId, but the schema already documents those adequately.

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: 'Liste et recherche les factures fournisseur', and clarifies the direction with '(factures reçues des prestataires)'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from boond_invoices_search, which is for sales invoices, so an agent can tell them apart immediately.

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 states the intended use case: tracking purchase invoices by supplier, status, or period. The 'Plutôt que' section explicitly names the alternative boond_invoices_search and explains why it should not be used here. This gives clear routing guidance without relying on inference.

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