Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Cartographie des compétences d'un périmètre

boond_workflow_cartographie_competences
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate a skill mapping runbook for a team or agency, highlighting top, rare, and missing competencies against open opportunities. Provides exact Boond API calls and filters for execution.

Instructions

Produit une cartographie des compétences techniques d'un périmètre (équipe, agence, …) : top compétences, compétences rares (risque bus-factor) et compétences manquantes vs opportunités ouvertes.

Quand : pour dérouler ce scénario multi-étapes sans avoir à retrouver soi-même le bon enchaînement d'outils et les bons noms de filtres. Plutôt que : le prompt MCP cartographie_competences si le client l'expose — contenu identique, sans consommer un appel d'outil. Cette variante existe pour les clients qui traitent mal prompts/get (claude.ai notamment).

  • N'appelle aucune API BoondManager et ne lit aucune donnée : la réponse est générée côté serveur MCP.

Returns : un runbook en texte — la liste ordonnée des appels Boond à effectuer, avec les filtres exacts. C'est ensuite au modèle de les exécuter ; rien n'est fait par cet appel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
top_nNoNombre de compétences à mettre en avant dans le top — entier (défaut: 20).
agency_idNoAgence pour cartographier toute une agence (alternatif à `manager_id`). Accepte soit l'ID numérique, soit le nom de l'agence (résolution auto via `boond_agencies_search`).
manager_idNoManager pour cibler son équipe. Accepte soit l'ID numérique, soit « Prénom Nom » (le serveur résoudra automatiquement via `boond_resources_search`). Si absent, scope = mon équipe via `perimeterDynamic: ['managers']`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / top_n / description
      Previous value: -"Nombre de compétences à mettre en avant dans le top (défaut: 20)."New value: +"Nombre de compétences à mettre en avant dans le top — entier (défaut: 20)."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.12.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  3. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the crucial non-obvious behavior: 'N'appelle aucune API BoondManager et ne lit aucune donnée : la réponse est générée côté serveur MCP' and clarifies it returns only a runbook — 'rien n'est fait par cet appel'. This prevents an agent from assuming the tool returns real data. No contradiction with annotations; the disclosure is consistent and additive.

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 longer than average but well-structured with clear sections (Quand, Plutôt que, the no-API note, Returns). The purpose is front-loaded and every section earns its place, especially the behavioral clarifications that are genuinely load-bearing. Slightly verbose in the 'Plutôt que' explanation, but not padded.

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?

Covers the purpose, output format (runbook en texte), behavior (server-side, no execution), and alternatives. It's complete for an agent to call this tool correctly. The only gap is not contrasting with sibling workflow tools such as boond_workflow_recherche_profil_competences, which would help disambiguation, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100% and each parameter (top_n, agency_id, manager_id) is richly documented in the schema, including default values, mutual exclusivity (alternatif à manager_id), and auto-resolution behaviors. The description adds no parameter detail, but per the rubric the baseline of 3 applies when the schema carries the full burden, which it does here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb and resource: 'Produit une cartographie des compétences techniques d'un périmètre (équipe, agence, …)' with a specific deliverable (top compétences, rares, manquantes). This distinguishes it from the many boond_ API tools, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling workflow boond_workflow_recherche_profil_competences (searching for a profile by skills), so differentiation among workflow siblings is only implicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit guidance with a 'Quand' section (run the multi-step scenario without reconstructing the tool sequence yourself) and a 'Plutôt que' section naming the prompt alternative `cartographie_competences`, including the trade-off (identical content, no tool call consumed, for clients that handle prompts/get poorly). It doesn't address when to choose this over other workflow tools, but the when-to-use and when-not-to guidance is solid.

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