Conecto

Design the job pages

hiring_design_careers

Idempotent

The look of the careers page and every job page with its application form, on top of the brand kit (account_set_brand: name, logo, colour): accent (buttons, links, chosen answers), background and text colours, font (conecto, system, serif or rounded), radius for corners (0 to 24 px), a cover image above the roles (cover_file_id from the file store; "" takes it away), the careers page headline, and css: your own stylesheet. The CSS is confined to the pages: every rule applies inside them, @import and the like are removed and listed in warnings, and "Hiring by Conecto" at the foot stays as it is. Only what you pass changes; "" clears one, reset: true clears them all. Costs $0.001 per call; nothing if it fails.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "hiring_design_careers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`css`	No	Rules for the pages' own classes (.jb-hero, .jb-role, .jb-job and the form's .fm-*); body and :root mean the page itself.
`font`	No
`text`	No	A hex colour like #0f5132; "" for the default.
`reset`	No
`accent`	No	A hex colour like #0f5132; "" for the default.
`radius`	No	Pixels; null for the default.
`headline`	No	Default "Careers at <name>".
`background`	No	A hex colour like #0f5132; "" for the default.
`cover_file_id`	No	A PNG, JPEG, WebP or GIF from the file store, kept as a JPEG of at most 2400 by 1200 pixels.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: CSS is scoped to the pages, @import-style rules are stripped and surfaced in warnings, the 'Hiring by Conecto' footer is immutable, partial updates only touch supplied fields, and pricing ($0.001 per call, free on failure) is disclosed. That is exactly the kind of side-effect and cost detail the annotation set cannot express.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: what it controls comes first, then constraints, then clearing semantics and cost. It reads as one long run-on paragraph, and the parameter enumeration could be broken into scannable clauses, but almost no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 9-parameter, all-optional mutation with annotations and no output schema, this covers what matters: scoping of CSS, sanitization warnings, immutability of the footer, reset behavior, and cost. The only gap is not saying where 'warnings' is returned, which is a minor omission given no output schema exists.

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?

With 78% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description genuinely adds meaning: cover_file_id of "" removes the cover, "" clears an individual field, reset:true wipes everything. Some text repeats the schema verbatim (hex format, font enum, 0-24 px radius, CSS class targets), which caps it below a 5.

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?

Concrete verb-and-resource content: it styles the careers page, every job page, and the application form, layered on the brand kit. It is clearly the visual-configuration tool rather than hiring_setup_careers or hiring_update_job. It stops short of naming those siblings, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied by the content (customize accent/background/font/radius/cover/headline/CSS). There is no explicit 'use this when...' or exclusion against hiring_setup_careers, which an agent could easily confuse with a page-design tool. The clearing semantics ('"" clears one, reset: true clears them all') help but are behavioral, not selection guidance.

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

All Conecto 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?