Semata

List ATS candidates

list_ats_candidates

Read-only

List bounded candidates from one ATS job.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>",
      "provider": "<provider>",
      "jobId": "<jobId>"
    },
    "name": "list_ats_candidates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`jobId`	Yes
`provider`	Yes
`workspaceId`	Yes	The workspace id returned by list_workspaces. Use 'personal' for the personal workspace.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only the ambiguous term 'bounded', without explaining result limits, pagination, authentication requirements, or rate limits.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Its brevity is efficient but contributes to the missing guidance elsewhere.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter ATS integration tool with no output schema, the description is missing key context: how to source jobId and provider, what 'bounded' means, and what the response contains. It is not sufficient for an agent to call this tool confidently without inspecting the schema and sibling tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, with jobId and provider undocumented in the schema. The description does not compensate by explaining how to obtain jobId, the provider enum values, or the role of workspaceId.

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?

States a clear verb (List) and resource (candidates) with scoping to one ATS job. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like list_candidates or import_ats_candidates, and the meaning of 'bounded' is left unclear.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_candidates, list_ats_jobs, or import_ats_candidates. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-selection criteria are provided.

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

All Semata tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?