Skip to main content
Glama

100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software

by com.100hires

Create note

hires_create_note

Create a discussion note for a candidate. Supports visibility control (all or private) and @mentions with email notifications. Always pass include=candidate when surfacing results in the widget — without it, the confirmation card can only show the candidate ID and cannot link to their backoffice profile.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesNote content. Supports HTML.
includeNoInclude related resources, e.g. 'user' for author details, 'candidate' for full candidate object with url_backoffice. Set to `candidate` so the widget can link the candidate name to their backoffice profile.
user_idNoAuthor user ID. If omitted, the authenticated user is used
visibilityNoVisibility: 'all' (default) or 'private'
candidate_idYesCandidate ID (numeric) or alias
mention_user_idsNoArray of user IDs to mention. Mentioned users receive email notifications.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mention of creation aligns. Adds context about visibility control and mentions behavior, but doesn't cover failure cases or rate limits. The note about include parameter behavior adds transparency beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences. The first states the core purpose, the second provides an essential implementation note. No extraneous information.

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?

Covers the essential purpose and key parameters with usage context. No output schema exists, but the description does not explain return values. Given the tool's complexity (6 params, creation), the guidance is adequate.

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 practical meaning to the include parameter (why it's needed for the widget) and briefly explains visibility and mentions, going 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 tool creates a discussion note for a candidate, mentions key features (visibility, @mentions), and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like update_note or delete_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 a crucial usage tip about always passing include=candidate for widget integration, indicating when to apply this parameter. Does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use, but the tip is contextually valuable.

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

All 100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software toolsInspect
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

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.

Resources