Skip to main content
Glama

List Employer Changes

list_employer_changes
Read-only

Ask an ENRICHMENT RUN who appears to have changed employer, comparing what it fetched against the account each contact is on. For 'who moved', after a run has fetched the employers. It reads what the run left behind: no CRM call, no provider call, no credit, nothing queued or changed. A mover here is a FINDING, not an action. IT NEEDS A RUN THAT ASKED FOR THE EMPLOYER: a contact's employer has no home on a contact -- the CRM holds an account link, the provider holds a company name -- so the template must OBSERVE employer_name. A run that did not returns examined 0, which means 'nothing was compared', NOT 'nobody moved'. Check examined before believing moved. IT IS NOT run_job_change_sweep, which enriches, compares and queues the whole departure in one step and spends credits doing it; this only answers, over a run that already paid. EACH MOVER CARRIES provider_record_id: hand those to create_records_run's person_ids and it creates each person under their new company, with no second search and no second credit. That is the composition: enrich, compare, create.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
run_idYesThe enrichment run whose staged employers to compare.
moved_onlyNoReturn only the movers. The examined and moved counts are reported either way, so this narrows the rows and never the answer.
connection_idYesThe CRM connection. Call list_crm_connections first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses that the tool makes no CRM or provider call, spends no credits, and changes nothing—a strong side-effect statement. It also explains the prerequisite run behavior and the meaning of examined 0, which is important for correct interpretation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded and each section has a purpose, but it is long (~190 words) with heavy all-caps emphasis and some repetition of what annotations already imply. It could be tighter without losing the essential distinctions.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description supplies the key output detail (each mover carries provider_record_id) plus the examined/moved count semantics. It does not describe the full row shape or pagination, but it covers the prerequisites and composition an agent needs to call and interpret the tool.

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 three parameters are already documented. The description adds a critical constraint on run_id: the run must have observed employer_name, which is 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 states a specific comparison action over an enrichment run's fetched employers and names the sibling it is not (run_job_change_sweep). It clearly distinguishes a finding from an action, so an agent can tell what the tool does without opening the schema.

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 says to use it after a run has fetched employers, requires the template to OBSERVE employer_name, and warns that a run without that returns examined 0. It names run_job_change_sweep as the alternative that enriches and queues, clarifying when not to use this.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.