Skip to main content
Glama

Post a job

hiring_create_job

A job with its own page and application form on the careers page (cncto.co/j//): name, email, phone, links, a résumé (PDF or Word), a cover letter and your questions. A draft unless open is true. Each application costs $0.50; posting is $0.01. Costs $0.01 per call; nothing if it fails.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "description": "<description>"
    },
    "name": "hiring_create_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
openNoTake applications now.
titleYese.g. "Bike mechanic".
filterNoWho the hiring team hears about: {"min_match": 70, "required": true, "max_risk": "minor"} (the lowest match score, every required criterion shown, the most risk the checks may find). With a filter, the team is told about a candidate once your screening (hiring_record_screening) passes it, in your words: by email to the careers page's notify address and as the event hiring.candidate_passed; not about every application as it arrives. null: no filter.
salaryNo{"min": 52000, "max": 60000, "currency": "USD", "period": "year"} (period: hour, month or year).
stagesNoThe steps between Applied and Hired/Rejected; default Screen, Interview, Offer.
criteriaNoWhat a screening checks: [{"text": "Three years in customer support", "required": true, "weight": 3}]. weight, 1 to 5, is how much it counts in the match score; a required one a screening does not find is named. Give a criterion's id (from hiring_list_jobs) when rewording it, so past screenings stay attached. Used by hiring_screen_queue and hiring_record_screening.
locationNoWhere the job is: the city with its state or country, e.g. "Portland, OR" or "Berlin, Germany"; for a remote job, the countries people may work from, e.g. "Remote (US, Canada)". Google's job search lists an open job once its location names the country.
questionsNoExtra questions on the application form: [{"label", "type", "required", "help"}]. type: short_text, long_text, yes_no, choice, multi_choice (both with "options": ["...", "..."]), number, date or url. A yes_no question can set "required_answer": true or false; any other answer flags the applicant (never an automatic no). A date question can take include_time (a time too), range (a first and a last day), and earliest and latest ("2026-11-01", or "today", "today+7", "today-30").
workplaceNo
departmentNo
descriptionYesMarkdown: the role, what they will do, what you look for, what you offer.
employment_typeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / location / description
      Previous value: -"e.g. \"Portland, OR\"."New value: +"Where the job is: the city with its state or country, e.g. \"Portland, OR\" or \"Berlin, Germany\"; for a remote job, the countries people may work from, e.g. \"Remote (US, Canada)\". Google's job search lists an open job once its location names the country."
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent profile; the description adds genuinely new behavior: the job gets a public page at a specific URL, it stays a draft unless open is true, and pricing is disclosed ($0.01 per call, $0.50 per application, $0.01 to post, refunded on failure). It stops short of stating prerequisites such as needing a careers page configured first.

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?

It is short, but front-loading is poor: the first sentence describes what the resulting job page contains rather than what the call does, which is the least decision-relevant information. The genuinely useful facts (draft default, cost) are buried in the middle and end.

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?

For a 12-parameter creation tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers cost and draft state but omits what is returned (job id, URL of the created page) and the setup prerequisite that a careers page must exist. An agent can call it, but cannot predict the response or know whether hiring_setup_careers must run first.

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 75% and the schema descriptions are themselves rich (filter, criteria, questions, location all carry examples). The description adds essentially nothing about parameters - the résumé/cover-letter/links list describes the application form, not any input field - so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description never states a verb: it opens with a noun phrase, 'A job with its own page and application form on the careers page', leaving the agent to infer that this creates a posting. The resource is clear and the detail about the application form is informative, but there is no explicit differentiation from siblings such as hiring_update_job or hiring_setup_careers.

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 when-to-use or when-not guidance is given, and the obvious alternative (hiring_update_job for an existing posting) is never mentioned. The only usable signal is the implicit 'this creates something new', which the agent must infer from the noun phrase.

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.

Resources