Greenhouse Ops Control Plane

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

list_scorecards

List scorecards in Greenhouse. By default returns operational scorecard metadata. detail_profile=answers includes per-question answers and attribute notes when expanded access is available.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	No	Comma-separated scorecard IDs to filter by
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor from a previous response. When provided, must be the only filter parameter.
`reason`	No	Required when detail_profile requests a broadened response shape.
`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
`interview_ids`	No	Comma-separated interview IDs to filter by
`detail_profile`	No	Projection profile. Default is operational; answers includes question and attribute text when expanded access is available.
`application_ids`	No	Comma-separated application IDs to filter by
`on_behalf_of_user_id`	No	Required when detail_profile=answers.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions expanded access requirements for the answers profile, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or any rate limits or pagination behavior beyond what the schema implies.

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, no extraneous words. The first sentence states the primary action and context, and the second handles the key parameter variation. Front-loaded and efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief. It covers the main profiles but lacks details on return structure, pagination, or comprehensive guidance on when to use this tool over others. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 the description adds minimal value beyond restating parameter details. It reinforces the default profile and the purpose of detail_profile, but does not explain new constraints or formatting beyond 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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'scorecards', and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_scorecard_questions by focusing on scorecard objects. The mention of operational vs. details profile clarifies the scope.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage by describing the detail_profile parameter but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as list_scorecard_questions. It provides some context for when to use the answers profile but lacks exclusions or alternate tool references.

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?