HireSquire Agent Ecosystem

compare_candidates

Perform a side-by-side AI comparison of 2-10 candidates. Use this when you need a clear "Delta Analysis" to decide between top-tier applicants for a final interview.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>",
      "candidate_ids": "<candidate_ids>"
    },
    "name": "compare_candidates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job_id`	Yes	The job ID.
`candidate_ids`	Yes	List of 2-10 candidate IDs to compare.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedMay 16, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / candidate_ids / description
```
Previous value: -"A list of candidate IDs to compare (minimum 2, maximum 10)."New value: +"List of 2-10 candidate IDs to compare."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / candidate_ids / items / description
```
Removed value: -"The unique ID of a candidate."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / candidate_ids / maxItems
```
Added value: +10
```
- addedInput schema / properties / candidate_ids / minItems
```
Added value: +2
```
- changedInput schema / properties / job_id / description
```
Previous value: -"The unique ID of the job posting."New value: +"The job ID."
```
First observedMay 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses very little. It calls this an "AI comparison" but says nothing about cost or credit consumption (notable given siblings like estimate_screening_cost and get_credit_balance), latency, whether the call is synchronous, or what the comparison produces.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the selection criterion, with no redundancy. The quoted "Delta Analysis" label is marketing flavor that does not add information, a minor blemish on otherwise tight phrasing.

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?

The tool is simple (two fully documented required params, no nesting) and its purpose is conveyed, but with no annotations and no output schema the agent still lacks the return shape and cost/latency expectations needed to invoke it confidently. Adequate, but with a clear gap around what comes back.

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 both parameters are already documented, and the description only restates the 2-10 candidate range that the schema's minItems/maxItems enforce. It adds no meaning about job_id's role in scoping the comparison, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb and resource ("side-by-side AI comparison of 2-10 candidates") and states the scope constraint on the candidate set. It is clear on its own, but it does not differentiate itself from result-oriented siblings such as get_results, which an agent might reasonably consider for the same decision.

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?

It gives an explicit use case — deciding between top-tier applicants for a final interview — which tells the agent the intended decision context. There is no when-not guidance and no named alternative, so the routing logic is only half complete.

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

All HireSquire Agent Ecosystem tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?