Skip to main content
Glama

Get interview result details

get_interview_result_details
Read-onlyIdempotent

[Results] Get full interview result details including transcript and scores. Scores are assistive output for a human reviewer. One result is a large record, so view controls how much of it comes back — the default (standard) omits only the raw machine assessment data.

Returns an interview result with its full transcript and AI assessment. Optionally attaches signed recording URLs.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoHow much of the record to return. Handled by the MCP server, not the JobMojito API — it only narrows the response, never the query. - `summary`: scores, the overall AI analysis, and each question with the candidate's answer — no per-answer AI commentary, recording paths or raw assessment data. Use this to review or compare candidates. - `standard`: everything a human reviewer reads: the full transcript with per-answer analysis, scores and recordings, minus the raw machine assessment blobs. This is the default. - `full`: every field, including the per-answer raw assessment data — condensed: pronunciation and sentiment scores per recognised segment with the lowest-scoring words, reading/gaze statistics, STT reliability, proctor status and seconds per detected speaker. Word-, character- and frame-level arrays are left out (listed in `_omitted`). Only ask for this if you need those assessment details.standard
conversation_idNoPass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.
interview_result_idYesThe interview result to fetch the transcript and details for.
get_signed_recordingsNoWhen true, includes short-lived signed recording URLs for the session, the video introduction, and each transcript answer.false

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoInterview end timestamp (training_end, ISO 8601).
scoreNoOverall interview score.
startNoInterview start timestamp (training_start, ISO 8601).
statusNoCoach/interview status (coach_status), e.g. started, completed.
durationNoTotal duration in deciseconds (duration_ds).
score_textNoHuman-readable score summary.
transcriptNoOrdered interactions (questions + answers) of the interview.
ai_analysisNoCandidate-facing AI analysis of the whole interview.
score_answerNoAggregate answer sub-score.
recording_urlNoSigned session-recording URL; present only when get_signed_recordings=true.
recruiter_risksNoDetected recruiter risk flags (jsonb).
score_sentimentNoSentiment sub-score.
score_simulationNoOverall simulated score.
_mcp_instructionsNoServer-issued metadata for this conversation.
ai_analysis_otherNoSession-level AI analyses keyed by analysis name (jsonb). `strengths_concerns`: { strengths: string[], concerns: string[] } (0-4 items each, recruiter-facing; called `hiring_reasons` with `reasons_to_hire` / `reasons_not_to_hire` inside before 2026-09-15, and rows written before then may still carry that shape). `takeaways`: { what_went_well: string[], next_steps: { text, priority: impact | quick | longterm, guidance: { kind: say | structure | length | exercise | perspective, text }, proof? }[], fixed?: string[] } (coaching / persona sessions, learner-facing; `proof` entries are { kind: quote | ai_summary | transcript_ref | document, text, ref?: { result_question_id } }; `fixed` lists the steps from the previous attempt that the learner did this time). `multi_department`: the multi-department-selection analysis. `score_rationale`: the rubric bracket of the session score and evidenced counts. `key_statement`: { quote, result_question_id }, the one verbatim quotation a recruiter would remember the candidate by (interview / persona_interview, absent when nothing distinctive was said). Further keys may be added.
recording_is_videoNoWhether the session recording is video.
score_pronunciationNoPronunciation sub-score.
ai_completion_reasonNoWhy the interview completed (ai_completed_reason).
recording_local_pathNoStorage path of the full session recording.
ai_analysis_recruiterNoRecruiter-facing AI analysis of the whole interview.
score_words_per_minuteNoSpeaking-pace (words per minute) sub-score.
video_introduction_urlNoSigned video-introduction URL; present only when get_signed_recordings=true.
user_feedback_recruiterNoRecruiter-entered feedback note.
video_introduction_local_pathNoStorage path of the candidate video introduction.
ai_analysis_recruiter_why_hireNoReasons to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.strengths_concerns.strengths, kept for existing integrations.
ai_interview_coverage_percentageNoPercentage of the intended interview the AI judged to be covered.
ai_analysis_recruiter_why_not_hireNoReasons not to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.strengths_concerns.concerns, kept for existing integrations.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / view / description
      Previous value: -"How much of the record to return. Handled by the MCP server, not the JobMojito API — it only narrows the response, never the query.\n\n- `summary`: scores, the overall AI analysis, and each question with the candidate's answer — no per-answer AI commentary, recording paths or raw assessment data. Use this to review or compare candidates.\n- `standard`: everything a human reviewer reads: the full transcript with per-answer analysis, scores and recordings, minus the raw machine assessment blobs. This is the default.\n- `full`: the API response verbatim, including the raw per-answer pronunciation/sentiment data. Large — a long interview can exceed the result limit and fail. Only ask for this if you need those raw fields."New value: +"How much of the record to return. Handled by the MCP server, not the JobMojito API — it only narrows the response, never the query.\n\n- `summary`: scores, the overall AI analysis, and each question with the candidate's answer — no per-answer AI commentary, recording paths or raw assessment data. Use this to review or compare candidates.\n- `standard`: everything a human reviewer reads: the full transcript with per-answer analysis, scores and recordings, minus the raw machine assessment blobs. This is the default.\n- `full`: every field, including the per-answer raw assessment data — condensed: pronunciation and sentiment scores per recognised segment with the lowest-scoring words, reading/gaze statistics, STT reliability, proctor status and seconds per detected speaker. Word-, character- and frame-level arrays are left out (listed in `_omitted`). Only ask for this if you need those assessment details."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / conversation_id / description
      Previous value: -"Echo the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it."New value: +"Pass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Echo the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _mcp_instructions
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Server-issued metadata for this conversation.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "conversation_id": {
      +      "description": "The server-issued conversation identifier.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_other / description
      Previous value: -"Session-level AI analyses keyed by analysis name (jsonb). `hiring_reasons`: { reasons_to_hire: string[], reasons_not_to_hire: string[] } (0-4 items each, recruiter-facing). `takeaways`: { what_went_well: string[], next_steps: { text, priority: impact | quick | longterm, guidance: { kind: say | structure | length | exercise | perspective, text }, proof? }[], fixed?: string[] } (coaching / persona sessions, learner-facing; `proof` entries are { kind: quote | ai_summary | transcript_ref | document, text, ref?: { result_question_id } }; `fixed` lists the steps from the previous attempt that the learner did this time). `multi_department`: the multi-department-selection analysis. `score_rationale`: the rubric bracket of the session score and evidenced counts. `key_statement`: { quote, result_question_id }, the one verbatim quotation a recruiter would remember the candidate by (interview / persona_interview, absent when nothing distinctive was said). Further keys may be added."New value: +"Session-level AI analyses keyed by analysis name (jsonb). `strengths_concerns`: { strengths: string[], concerns: string[] } (0-4 items each, recruiter-facing; called `hiring_reasons` with `reasons_to_hire` / `reasons_not_to_hire` inside before 2026-09-15, and rows written before then may still carry that shape). `takeaways`: { what_went_well: string[], next_steps: { text, priority: impact | quick | longterm, guidance: { kind: say | structure | length | exercise | perspective, text }, proof? }[], fixed?: string[] } (coaching / persona sessions, learner-facing; `proof` entries are { kind: quote | ai_summary | transcript_ref | document, text, ref?: { result_question_id } }; `fixed` lists the steps from the previous attempt that the learner did this time). `multi_department`: the multi-department-selection analysis. `score_rationale`: the rubric bracket of the session score and evidenced counts. `key_statement`: { quote, result_question_id }, the one verbatim quotation a recruiter would remember the candidate by (interview / persona_interview, absent when nothing distinctive was said). Further keys may be added."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_recruiter_why_hire / description
      Previous value: -"Reasons to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.hiring_reasons.reasons_to_hire, kept for existing integrations."New value: +"Reasons to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.strengths_concerns.strengths, kept for existing integrations."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_recruiter_why_not_hire / description
      Previous value: -"Reasons not to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.hiring_reasons.reasons_not_to_hire, kept for existing integrations."New value: +"Reasons not to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.strengths_concerns.concerns, kept for existing integrations."
  5. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_other
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Session-level AI analyses keyed by analysis name (jsonb). `hiring_reasons`: { reasons_to_hire: string[], reasons_not_to_hire: string[] } (0-4 items each, recruiter-facing). `takeaways`: { what_went_well: string[], next_steps: { text, priority: impact | quick | longterm, guidance: { kind: say | structure | length | exercise | perspective, text }, proof? }[], fixed?: string[] } (coaching / persona sessions, learner-facing; `proof` entries are { kind: quote | ai_summary | transcript_ref | document, text, ref?: { result_question_id } }; `fixed` lists the steps from the previous attempt that the learner did this time). `multi_department`: the multi-department-selection analysis. `score_rationale`: the rubric bracket of the session score and evidenced counts. `key_statement`: { quote, result_question_id }, the one verbatim quotation a recruiter would remember the candidate by (interview / persona_interview, absent when nothing distinctive was said). Further keys may be added."
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_recruiter_why_hire / description
      Previous value: -"Reasons to hire (list/text)."New value: +"Reasons to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.hiring_reasons.reasons_to_hire, kept for existing integrations."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ai_analysis_recruiter_why_not_hire / description
      Previous value: -"Reasons not to hire (list/text)."New value: +"Reasons not to hire (list). Deprecated: a copy of ai_analysis_other.hiring_reasons.reasons_not_to_hire, kept for existing integrations."
  6. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": "standard",
      +  "description": "How much of the record to return. Handled by the MCP server, not the JobMojito API — it only narrows the response, never the query.\n\n- `summary`: scores, the overall AI analysis, and each question with the candidate's answer — no per-answer AI commentary, recording paths or raw assessment data. Use this to review or compare candidates.\n- `standard`: everything a human reviewer reads: the full transcript with per-answer analysis, scores and recordings, minus the raw machine assessment blobs. This is the default.\n- `full`: the API response verbatim, including the raw per-answer pronunciation/sentiment data. Large — a long interview can exceed the result limit and fail. Only ask for this if you need those raw fields.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "summary",
      +    "standard",
      +    "full"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  7. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already covering readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, the description adds real value: scores are assistive (not authoritative) output, the record is large, the default view omits raw machine assessment data, and signed recording URLs are optional. It does not mention pagination or auth requirements, but the behavioral additions clearly exceed the annotations.

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?

The lead sentence front-loads the purpose and the size/view tradeoff. The second paragraph slightly restates the first (transcript + AI assessment, signed recordings), which is minor redundancy, but overall the description is tight and appropriately sized.

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?

An output schema exists so return-value detail is unnecessary, and the description covers the non-obvious parts: view granularity, the assistive nature of scores, and large record size. Only the sibling-routing question (why this over list_interview_results) is left unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100% and the view enum is documented in exhaustive detail in the schema itself. The description only restates the default and what it omits, adding little beyond structured data — the expected baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Get full interview result details including transcript and scores") and clarifies the payload scope. It does not explicitly name the nearest sibling (list_interview_results), so an agent must infer the distinction from context rather than being told it.

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?

The description gives implied guidance via the view-default note and the caution that scores are assistive output for a human reviewer. However, the concrete when-to-use routing (summary for comparing candidates, full only when assessment details are needed) lives in the schema, not the description, and no alternative tool is named.

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.