Skip to main content
Glama
silamir

boondmanager-mcp-server

by silamir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Synthèse d'une équipe

boond_workflow_synthese_equipe
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate a runbook of Boond API calls to synthesize team status: assignments, absences, availability. Resolves manager and period automatically, providing exact filters for execution.

Instructions

Produit un état d'équipe : qui est sur quoi, qui est absent, qui est disponible. Si manager_id est omis, utilise l'utilisateur courant comme manager.

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 synthese_equipe 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
periodeNoPériode d'analyse (ex: 'cette semaine', 'mois dernier', '2026-04', 'avril 2026', '2026-W14'). Défaut: mois en cours. Résolue en dates ISO côté serveur.
manager_idNoManager ciblé. Accepte soit l'ID numérique, soit « Prénom Nom » (le serveur résoudra automatiquement via `boond_resources_search`). Si absent, l'outil `boond_application_current_user` est appelé pour le récupérer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / periode / description
      Previous value: -"Période d'analyse libre (ex: 'cette semaine', 'avril 2026'). Défaut: mois en cours."New value: +"Période d'analyse (ex: 'cette semaine', 'mois dernier', '2026-04', 'avril 2026', '2026-W14'). Défaut: mois en cours. Résolue en dates ISO côté serveur."
  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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds crucial context beyond that: 'N'appelle aucune API BoondManager et ne lit aucune donnée' — clarifying the tool is a server-side runbook generator that doesn't touch the API. This prevents a model from expecting actual data retrieval. No contradiction with 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?

Well-structured with labeled sections (Quand, Plutôt que, Returns) and front-loaded purpose. Each sentence earns its place, though there is minor redundancy with schema content regarding parameter behavior.

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 complex workflow tool with no output schema, the description explains the return value (a text runbook with ordered calls and exact filters), when to use it, and what it doesn't do. Both parameters are covered at 100% schema coverage, making this quite complete for an agent to call correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already well documented in the schema, including the server-side resolution of periode to ISO dates and manager_id via boond_resources_search. The description restates the manager_id omission fallback (uses current user), which is also in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 outcome: 'Produit un état d'équipe : qui est sur quoi, qui est absent, qui est disponible.' It clearly states what the tool produces (a team status overview) and immediately clarifies it generates a runbook rather than executing anything, distinguishing it from the many data-reading sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit 'Quand' (when to use: to run a multi-step scenario without figuring out tool chains and filter names) and 'Plutôt que' (prefer the MCP prompt `synthese_equipe` if available) guidance, naming the alternative and the condition that selects it. Nothing is left to 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