Panta Swiss Job Market Data

Search Swiss jobs

search_jobs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search indexed Swiss-eligible jobs from enabled sources. Inspect source_freshness and location_class; current means refreshable, not guaranteed open. No exhaustive market coverage.

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": "search_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Keywords. All searchable terms must match; searches titles and descriptions. At most 12 terms are interpreted. Maximum 200 UTF-8 bytes.
`role`	No	Reviewed occupational title collection, version 2026-11-04.1. Applied before pagination; may overlap other collections.
`sort`	No	Default: relevance with keywords, otherwise newest.
`limit`	No	Results per page (1–50).
`canton`	No	Swiss canton code.
`offset`	No	Use next_offset from the previous response; maximum 5000.
`sector`	No	Employer sector contains this text. Maximum 40 UTF-8 bytes.
`company`	No	Employer name contains this text; not a company ID. Maximum 48 UTF-8 bytes.
`category`	No	Reviewed title-based role family, version 2026-10-27.2. Not an employer-sector filter.
`geography`	No	Work arrangement; does not imply Swiss remote eligibility.
`company_id`	No	Exact canonical employer ID returned by company search; preferred for employer-specific queries.
`location_class`	No	Location evidence classification. Swiss search excludes ambiguous and non-Swiss results.
`employment_type`	No	Employment type contains this text, e.g. full-time. Maximum 48 UTF-8 bytes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: results come only from enabled sources, freshness means refreshable rather than confirmed-open, and coverage is deliberately non-exhaustive. That is real caveat context beyond the structured fields, though it says nothing about result volume or pagination behavior.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the core action and its scope come first, followed by interpretation guidance and the coverage caveat. Every clause carries distinct information.

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?

For a 13-parameter, all-optional search tool with no output schema, the definition covers what it searches, the source scope, and how to read freshness and location results, which is the main ambiguity risk. It stops short of describing pagination (next_offset/offset flow) or the shape of returned results, which would fully close the gap.

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%, so all 13 parameters including the six enums are already documented in detail. The description references location_class and source_freshness but adds no syntax, default, or interaction semantics beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 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?

"Search indexed Swiss-eligible jobs from enabled sources" gives a specific verb (search), a specific resource (jobs), and a scoping qualifier (Swiss-eligible, indexed, enabled sources) that separates it from get_job, get_company_jobs, and list_saved_jobs. An agent can tell this is the discovery tool versus the retrieval-by-ID or saved-list siblings without opening any schema.

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 result-interpretation guidance (inspect source_freshness and location_class; "current" means refreshable, not guaranteed open) and sets expectations with "No exhaustive market coverage." However, it never states when to prefer this over siblings like get_company_jobs for employer-scoped lookups or get_job for a known ID, so tool selection is only implied.

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

All Panta Swiss Job Market Data 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?