Skip to main content
Glama

100Hires - AI ATS & Recruitment Software

by com.100hires

hires_reject_application

Destructive

Reject an application with an optional rejection reason. Use GET /taxonomy/rejection-reasons to list available reason IDs. Set suppress_notification to skip the rejection email.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesApplication ID.
includeNoComma-separated relations to embed: candidate, cv.text, job.
rejection_reason_idNoRejection reason ID from GET /taxonomy/rejection-reasons.
suppress_notificationNoSet to true to skip sending the rejection email to the candidate.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows it's destructive. The description adds value by explaining the notification suppression option. No contradictions with annotations; behavioral traits are well disclosed.

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 three concise sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the action and provides essential additional information efficiently. Every sentence adds value.

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 the 4 parameters, no output schema, and destructive annotation, the description covers critical usage details: how to get reason IDs and suppress notifications. It does not explain return values or error handling, but those are often standard for such tools. Overall, it is sufficient for agent invocation.

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 parameters are documented. The description adds extra meaning: it specifies how to obtain rejection_reason_id values and explains the function of suppress_notification. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 rejects an application, with optional rejection reason. It distinguishes from siblings like batch_reject and unreject by focusing on a single application rejection. The verb 'reject' and resource 'application' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear context by advising to use GET /taxonomy/rejection-reasons for reason IDs and to set suppress_notification to skip the email. It lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use, but the presence of sibling tools like batch_reject implies the single-application scope.

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