Skip to main content
Glama

business_cover_letter

Read-onlyIdempotent

Cover letter maker

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whyNoWhy this company, as a clause that follows 'because': 'your mission to cut waste'. A leading 'because' and capital letter are fixed for you.
dateYesThe letter date. A YYYY-MM-DD date is written out in full (November 5, 2026); other text is used as typed.
nameYes
roleYes
foundNoWhere you found the job, in a word or phrase: LinkedIn, on Indeed, a friend, your careers page. A preposition is added when it is missing.
yearsNoYears of experience: 8, 8 years or 8+ years all become '8 years of experience'.
companyYes
contactYesContact lines, one per line. At least one line must be an email address, a phone number or a LinkedIn address (422 otherwise); the closing line "I can be reached at ..." uses the email and phone, never a city.
managerNoHiring manager's name. Default: Hiring Manager.
includeDocxNotrue also returns the letter as a Word file in result.docx (filename, contentType, base64). Default false: the result holds the text and sections only.
achievementsYesBest results for this job, one per line

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / contact / description
      Previous value: -"Contact lines, one per line"New value: +"Contact lines, one per line. At least one line must be an email address, a phone number or a LinkedIn address (422 otherwise); the closing line \"I can be reached at ...\" uses the email and phone, never a city."
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / date / description
      Added value: +"The letter date. A YYYY-MM-DD date is written out in full (November 5, 2026); other text is used as typed."
    • addedInput schema / properties / found / description
      Added value: +"Where you found the job, in a word or phrase: LinkedIn, on Indeed, a friend, your careers page. A preposition is added when it is missing."
    • addedInput schema / properties / includeDocx
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "true also returns the letter as a Word file in result.docx (filename, contentType, base64). Default false: the result holds the text and sections only.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / manager / description
      Added value: +"Hiring manager's name. Default: Hiring Manager."
    • addedInput schema / properties / why / description
      Added value: +"Why this company, as a clause that follows 'because': 'your mission to cut waste'. A leading 'because' and capital letter are fixed for you."
    • addedInput schema / properties / years / description
      Added value: +"Years of experience: 8, 8 years or 8+ years all become '8 years of experience'."
  3. First observed

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing further — no mention that a 422 is returned when contact lacks email/phone/LinkedIn, no note on the default 'Hiring Manager' or the docx option, all of which live only in the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three words is not concision but under-specification; there is no front-loaded statement of purpose, inputs, or output, so the brevity costs the agent information rather than saving it.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is an 11-parameter generator with no output schema, yet the description says nothing about what is returned (text plus sections, optionally result.docx), what validation can fail, or how the inputs shape the letter. The schema carries most of the burden, leaving the definition inadequate for a tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 73%, below the high-coverage threshold, and the description contributes zero parameter meaning. Several properties (name, role, company) are undocumented in both places, and nothing explains the interaction between the required fields and the generated letter structure.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Cover letter maker" restates the tool name with no added specificity: no verb beyond an implied 'generate', no statement of what a cover letter output contains or how it differs from siblings like business_resume_outline or business_offer_letter_draft.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many adjacent document-generation siblings, and no prerequisites (required contact info, what inputs produce a usable letter) are mentioned anywhere in the description.

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.

Resources