Skip to main content
Glama

100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software

by com.100hires

List jobs

hires_list_jobs
Read-only

List jobs with optional filters by status, date range, department, or search query. Returns paginated results. Use for career-site sync, reporting, and external system indexing. Recommended size <= 10: full job payloads include description HTML and can be large; if the response exceeds the budget the tool returns isError:true with error_code=response_too_large and retry hints — reduce size, narrow filters, or fetch a single record via hires_get_job.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch by job title or internal title (partial match)
pageNoPage number (default 1)
sizeNoPage size (default 20)
viewNoResponse shape. Default `summary` excludes heavy fields (description HTML, indeed_posting_data, ai_scoring_criteria) and embedded relations — recommended for list operations. Use `full` only when description or include=workflow/hiring_team/pipeline_stages is genuinely needed; call hires_get_job for a single full record.summary
statusNoFilter by job status name (from GET /taxonomy/statuses, e.g. Public, Draft, Archived)
includeNoComma-separated related resources to embed: workflow, hiring_team, pipeline_stages
company_idNoFilter by company ID (required only for multi-company API keys)
department_idNoFilter jobs by department ID (from GET /taxonomy/departments)
updated_afterNoReturn only jobs updated at or after this time. Unix timestamp (seconds) or ISO-8601 string (e.g. 2026-05-11T00:00:00Z). Fractional seconds accepted but truncated. Use for incremental sync.
created_at_endNoReturn only jobs created at or before this time. Unix timestamp (seconds) or ISO-8601 string (e.g. 2026-05-11T00:00:00Z). Fractional seconds accepted but truncated.
created_at_startNoReturn only jobs created at or after this time. Unix timestamp (seconds) or ISO-8601 string (e.g. 2026-05-11T00:00:00Z). Fractional seconds accepted but truncated.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details: returns paginated results, can error with response_too_large, and size recommendations. No contradiction. However, it doesn't mention rate limits or sorting behavior.

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?

The description is efficient: first sentence states purpose and filters, second sentence mentions pagination, third states use cases, fourth gives critical size guidance and error handling. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given 11 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filters, pagination, use cases, and error behavior. It could mention default ordering or response structure, but for a list tool it is sufficiently 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%, so baseline is 3. The description summarizes filters (status, date range, department, search) but doesn't add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema descriptions already provide. The size and error info is useful but not parameter-specific.

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 'List jobs' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hires_get_job by mentioning optional filters and suggesting it for bulk operations. The error handling hints further differentiate it.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states use cases: 'Use for career-site sync, reporting, and external system indexing.' Provides when-not guidance through error handling: 'fetch a single record via hires_get_job' and advice on reducing size or narrowing filters.

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