Skip to main content
Glama

100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software

by com.100hires

hires_create_nurture_campaign

Create a nurture campaign with steps. Steps are executed sequentially; each step has a type (email, sms, voicemail, move_to_next_stage, assign_tag, assign_task) with type-specific fields. Optionally bind to a workflow stage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stepsYesCampaign steps (at least one required)
titleYesCampaign name
stage_idNoStage ID that triggers the campaign
timezoneNoIANA timezone, e.g. "America/New_York"
company_idNoTarget company ID (optional if API key is scoped to one company)
delay_timeNoDelay time in seconds
send_to_allNoSend to all candidates or only new ones (default false)
workflow_idNoWorkflow ID to bind the campaign to
relative_daysNoRelative days for schedule
relative_timeNoRelative time for schedule (seconds from midnight)
response_move_to_stage_idNoStage to move candidate to when they reply

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that steps are executed sequentially and lists type-specific fields, providing useful behavioral context 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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, no wasted text. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given complexity (11 params, nested steps) and no output schema, the description omits return value and prerequisites. It covers core but could be more complete.

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 100% and already describes parameters in detail. The description gives a high-level overview but adds minimal meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 it creates a nurture campaign with steps, listing step types and executing sequentially. It differentiates from sibling tools like update/get/delete.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The description notes optional workflow binding but lacks when-not-to-use or comparisons to other tools.

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