get_job
Fetch a single active job by id. Returns basic job fields + an apply URL.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Job id, e.g. `job_8f2a1c` (from a search_jobs result's `id`). | |
| locale | No | id | en (default id). |
Fetch a single active job by id. Returns basic job fields + an apply URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Job id, e.g. `job_8f2a1c` (from a search_jobs result's `id`). | |
| locale | No | id | en (default id). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / idAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Job id, e.g. `job_8f2a1c` (from a search_jobs result's `id`).",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / properties / include_region_lockedRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Default false. When true, return the job even if it is region-locked away from Indonesia; read `indonesiaEligibility` on the result.",
- "type": "boolean"
-}Input schema / properties / job_idRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Job id from a search_jobs result.",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / localeAdded value: +{
+ "description": "id | en (default id).",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "job_id"
-]New value: +[
+ "id"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does add useful signals: the lookup is restricted to 'active' jobs and the response includes basic fields plus an apply URL. It stops short of stating behavior for missing/expired ids, errors, auth needs, or rate limits, which matters for an unannotated tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, no filler, with the core operation front-loaded and the return shape appended as secondary information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does and roughly what comes back, which is sufficient to call it correctly. The gaps are minor: locale is unmentioned and the 'active only' constraint's consequence for non-active ids is left unstated.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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, including the id format and its provenance from search_jobs results. The description adds nothing beyond 'by id' and never mentions the optional locale parameter. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource with scope: fetch a single active job by id. This implicitly separates it from the discovery-oriented sibling search_jobs, but it never names that sibling or any other alternative explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied by the phrase 'by id' — an agent can infer this is the follow-up call once it has a job id. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and no alternative named among the eleven siblings such as search_jobs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.