Selenios

List position interviews

list_job_meetings

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the interviews of a job position: title, candidate, type, status and start time, plus hasTranscript and hasReport flags. The transcript and the report themselves are not included. Paginated with cursor (from pageInfo.nextCursor) and incremental with updatedSince.

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": {
      "jobDescriptionId": "<jobDescriptionId>"
    },
    "name": "list_job_meetings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Records per page (default: 20, max: 1000). Values above ~50 are meant for programmatic syncing, not for reasoning over the results.
`cursor`	No	Opaque cursor from the previous page (`pageInfo.nextCursor`). Omit for the first page. Treat it as a token — do not construct or modify it.
`sortBy`	No	Sort field (default: startTime).
`status`	No	Filter by meeting status
`sortOrder`	No	Sort order (default: desc).
`updatedSince`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp. Returns only records modified strictly after it, for incremental syncing. Deleted records are never returned.
`jobDescriptionId`	Yes	The job position ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety bar is low. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond that: field-level return contents, absence of transcript/report bodies, cursor pagination via pageInfo.nextCursor, and incremental semantics for updatedSince.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three tight sentences: what it returns first, then what it does not return, then pagination/sync mechanics. No filler, and the most decision-relevant fact (no transcript/report payloads) is placed early.

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 no output schema, listing the returned fields and flags carries the burden adequately, and the pagination/sync behavior is covered. Minor gaps remain: the response envelope (e.g. pageInfo shape) and ordering defaults are left entirely to the input schema, and no guidance is given on sensible limit choices at the description level.

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 every parameter the description touches (cursor, updatedSince) is already fully documented in the schema, including the warning about not constructing cursors and that deleted records are never returned. The description adds no new syntax or constraint detail, so the baseline applies.

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?

Specific verb ('List') plus resource ('interviews of a job position') plus the enumerated fields returned. The scope qualifier 'of a job position' implicitly separates it from siblings like list_meetings and list_candidate_meetings, and the note that transcripts/reports are excluded separates it from get_meeting_transcript and get_meeting_report.

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?

Useful routing signal: it says the transcript and report 'themselves are not included,' which steers the agent to the get_meeting_transcript / get_meeting_report siblings when full content is needed, and the hasTranscript/hasReport flags explain how to decide. It stops short of naming alternatives explicitly or giving an exclusion rule against list_job / list_candidate_meetings.

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

All Selenios 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?