Skip to main content
Glama

100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software

Advance application to next stage

hires_advance_application
Destructive

Advance an application to the next pipeline stage according to workflow order. No stage_id needed -- the system determines the next stage automatically. Always pass include=candidate,job when surfacing results in the widget — without it, the confirmation card can only show candidate/job IDs and cannot link to their backoffice pages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesApplication ID.
includeNoComma-separated relations to embed: candidate, cv.text, job. Set to `candidate,job` so the widget can link the candidate name to their profile and the job title to its pipeline view.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that no stage_id is needed, but does not elaborate on edge cases like advancing from the last stage or potential side effects.

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, both essential. The first states the core functionality, the second provides critical usage guidance. No redundant or extraneous content.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, so the description should ideally explain what the response contains. It does not. However, for invocation purposes it is adequate, covering the two parameters and the automatic stage selection.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining why include=candidate,job is important for widget linking, which goes beyond the schema description.

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 'advance' and the resource 'application', specifying that it moves to the next pipeline stage automatically. This distinguishes it from siblings like hires_move_application which likely requires a target stage.

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?

The description clearly indicates when to use this tool (to advance an application automatically) and provides critical guidance on the include parameter for widget results. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with alternative tools.

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.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes due to specific entity and action combinations. However, with 133 tools, there is some overlap (e.g., multiple ways to move applications) and similar-sounding operations (e.g., batch_remove_tags vs remove_candidate_tag) that could cause confusion. The detailed descriptions help but the sheer number increases ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'hires_verb_noun' pattern with snake_case. Verbs are descriptive (create, list, get, delete, update, batch) and nouns match the domain entities (candidate, application, job, etc.). No mixing of conventions like camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count2/5

133 tools is excessive for a typical server scope. While a full-featured ATS requires many operations, this count suggests insufficient aggregation. Tools for similar entities (e.g., multiple update/delete variants) could be consolidated. The high number overwhelms the tool surface and increases complexity.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core CRUD operations for major entities (candidates, applications, jobs, companies, users, messages, forms, etc.) plus batch operations, webhooks, and advanced features like AI scoring and nurture campaigns. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct reporting/analytics tools), but most workflows can be executed.