Greenhouse Ops Control Plane

by app.vercel.ats-ops-control-plane-gateway

list_job_interviews

List interviews configured on jobs in Greenhouse. Shows interview details including scheduling type, duration, and instructions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Comma-separated interview IDs to filter by
`active`	No	Filter by active status
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor from a previous response. When provided, must be the only filter parameter.
`job_ids`	No	Comma-separated job IDs to filter by
`per_page`	No	Results per page (1-500, default 100)
`created_at`	No	Filter by creation date. Format: operator\|ISO8601 (e.g. gte\|2024-01-01T00:00:00Z). Operators: gte, lte, gt, lt
`updated_at`	No	Filter by update date. Format: operator\|ISO8601 (e.g. gte\|2024-01-01T00:00:00Z). Operators: gte, lte, gt, lt
`scheduling_type`	No	Filter by scheduling type
`job_interview_stage_ids`	No	Comma-separated interview stage IDs to filter by

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description only states it lists interviews, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication needs, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral context beyond the listing nature.

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?

Two sentences, 18 words, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words.

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?

With 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain return structure, pagination details, or parameter interactions. Incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 9 parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the verb (List), resource (interviews configured on jobs in Greenhouse), and details shown (scheduling type, duration, instructions). Among siblings like 'list_interviews' and 'list_scheduled_interviews', it distinguishes itself by specifying 'configured on jobs'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'list_interviews' or 'list_scheduled_interviews'. No conditions or alternatives mentioned.

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

All Greenhouse Ops Control Plane tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

With 87 tools, there is potential for confusion among similar list tools (e.g., list_candidates vs list_applied_candidate_tags), but each tool targets a distinct entity or action, and descriptions provide enough clarity to differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase with underscores (e.g., list_jobs, get_application, patch_candidate_profile). No mixing of styles or irregular conventions.

Tool Count1/5

At 87 tools, the count is extremely high for a single server, exceeding the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. While the domain is broad, the number of tools is likely to overwhelm agents and dilute focus.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations (list, get, patch, add, remove, upsert) across many entities, but lacks basic CRUD for core objects like jobs and candidates (no create_job or create_candidate), leaving notable gaps.

Resources

Need Help?