Greenhouse Ops Control Plane

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

upsert_job_note

Create or patch a job note in Greenhouse. With note_id present, patches that note; otherwise creates a new note unless an identical note already exists.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes	Job note body.
`job_id`	Yes	The job ID to annotate
`reason`	Yes	Human-readable audit reason for this change. Must be at least 12 characters.
`dry_run`	No	When true, validate and preview the change without sending a write request.
`note_id`	No	Existing job note ID to patch instead of creating a new note.
`subject`	No
`visibility`	No		privately_visible
`on_behalf_of_user_id`	Yes	Greenhouse user ID to send with this write.
`confirm_job_note_write`	Yes	Must be true to execute a job note write.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Discloses core upsert behavior and deduplication logic. However, lacks details on permissions, rate limits, idempotency, or side effects. The 'confirm_job_note_write' parameter suggests safety but is unexplained.

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 efficient sentences that front-load the purpose and then clarify conditional behavior. No redundant or vague phrasing.

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?

Lacks explanation of return values (no output schema) and the deduplication criterion ('identical') is vague. With 9 parameters and 5 required, more context on outcomes would be helpful.

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 covers 78% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the conditional role of note_id. Does not fully compensate for missing schema descriptions on subject and visibility.

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?

Clearly states the action (create or patch) on a specific resource (job note) and distinguishes based on note_id presence. Differentiates from sibling tools like upsert_application_note.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides clear conditional usage: patch when note_id present, create otherwise, with deduplication. Does not explicitly discuss when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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?