JobMojito

List the company's reasons

list_reasons

Read-onlyIdempotent

[Reasons] The company's decision reasons (why a candidate was rejected or withdrew, kind reject / withdraw) and position status reasons (the reason_id set_interview_state needs for on_hold and cancelled, with the lifecycles each applies_to). type narrows to one; include_archived=true adds the archived ones. A company has six default position status reasons from the moment the position lifecycle is on.

Every argument in full, with examples: get_tool_reference.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_reasons"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No	Decision reasons only: reject or withdraw.
`type`	No	Only one type: decision (reject / withdraw reasons) or position_status (the reason_id of a position lifecycle change). Left out: both, without a type the company has switched off.
`language`	No	Language of a decision reason's display_label (default en).	en
`llm_model`	No	Your model id, e.g. "claude-opus-4-8"; "unknown" if unsure. For analytics.
`merchant_id`	No	Optional merchant to scope to. Admins and sub-merchant operators only; other callers always use their token's merchant.
`conversation_id`	No	The conversation_id this server returned earlier in this conversation, unchanged, including after later user messages. Omit it if you have none. Recorded for the server developer's analytics.
`include_archived`	No	true: also the archived reasons, which past decisions keep but are no longer offered.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`_mcp_instructions`	No	Server-issued metadata for this conversation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behaviour, so the bar is lower. The description adds real context beyond them: archived reasons are retained for past decisions but not offered anymore, and a company has six default position status reasons once the lifecycle is on. It doesn't describe pagination or response shape, but that is largely covered by the output schema.

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 resource and its two subtypes are front-loaded, and each sentence carries purpose or behavioural detail. Some phrasing is dense and slightly garbled ('Left out: both, without a type the company has switched off') and the closing reference pointer adds a small amount of noise.

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?

With an output schema present, returns needn't be explained, and all seven parameters are schema-documented. The description covers the semantic distinctions, archive behaviour, and default reasons, leaving only minor gaps such as pagination or ordering, which are not critical for a read-only list call.

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 a baseline of 3 applies, but the description adds meaning on top: it explains that kind maps to reject/withdraw, that type selects decision vs. position_status, that omitting type yields both minus disabled ones, and that include_archived surfaces reasons no longer offered. The pointer to get_tool_reference for full argument examples is mild deflection but acceptable given the rich schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('list ... The company's decision reasons ... and position status reasons') and splits it into the two concrete subtypes (kind reject/withdraw vs. the reason_id set_interview_state needs for on_hold/cancelled). An agent can distinguish this from neighbours like get_tool_reference without opening the schema.

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 clear conditional guidance: 'type narrows to one', omitting type returns both minus disabled ones, and include_archived=true adds archived reasons. It also implicitly routes position_status lookups to the pre-requisite of set_interview_state. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative tool or stating when not to call it.

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

All JobMojito 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.