Compass OS: Career

remove jobs

remove_jobs

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove up to 50 roles from the user's pipeline in one call, each by company and title as list_pipeline shows them, along with their tailored resumes and cover letters. Use it to trim the pipeline (read list_pipeline, then remove every role that goes in one call); to keep a role on record as closed, use move_job to Rejected or Withdrawn instead. It asks the user first. Roles not found are counted in the reply, and a company with several roles and no title stops the call so you can ask which. Nothing goes to anyone. Returns what was removed and how many roles are left. Once it's saved, undo can put it back within 24 hours.

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": {
      "jobs": "<jobs>"
    },
    "name": "remove_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobs`	Yes	The roles to remove, 1 to 50, each by company and title as list_pipeline shows them

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	Yes	The answer, or what was done, in plain words for the user: the same text as content
`undo`	No	On a saved write: its undo handle, for undo within 24 hours
`widget`	No	The card the host draws with it, e.g. "pipeline"; "confirm" means a write waits for the user's Yes and nothing is saved yet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / jobs / description

Previous value: -"The roles to remove, 1 to 50, each by company and title as pipeline shows them"New value: +"The roles to remove, 1 to 50, each by company and title as list_pipeline shows them"

Changed1 schema field changedNov 5, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / undo

Added value: +{
+  "description": "On a saved write: its undo handle, for undo within 24 hours",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / jobs / description

Added value: +"The roles to remove, 1 to 50, each by company and title as pipeline shows them"

addedInput schema / properties / jobs / items / properties / company / description
```
Added value: +"The employer's name, e.g. \"Stripe\""
```

changedInput schema / properties / jobs / items / properties / title / description

Previous value: -"The role's title; leave it empty when the user named only the company"New value: +"The role's title as the pipeline lists it; leave it empty when the user named only the company"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "text": {
+      "description": "The answer, or what was done, in plain words for the user: the same text as content",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "widget": {
+      "description": "The card the host draws with it, e.g. \"pipeline\"; \"confirm\" means a write waits for the user's Yes and nothing is saved yet",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "text"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive and idempotent, and the description adds context they cannot carry: it asks the user first, missing roles are counted rather than erroring, a company with multiple roles and no title halts the call, no notifications are sent, and undo is available for 24 hours. These are the exact failure and recovery behaviors an agent needs before a destructive call.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then layered with confirmation, edge cases, and undo. It is dense and largely waste-free, though the single paragraph chains many clauses and could be split for scannability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive batch tool with one parameter this covers the ambiguous-input path, the confirmation step, the recovery window, and the side effects on related documents, leaving nothing an agent needs before invoking it.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by tying values to another tool's output ('each by company and title as list_pipeline shows them') and noting the title may be omitted when only a company was named. The 1-50 bound is stated in both places, so the gain is modest rather than transformative.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove up to 50 roles from the user's pipeline') plus the side effects ('along with their tailored resumes and cover letters'). An agent can distinguish it from move_job and list_pipeline 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly prescribes the workflow ('read list_pipeline, then remove every role that goes in one call') and names the alternative with its condition ('to keep a role on record as closed, use move_job to Rejected or Withdrawn instead'). Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Compass OS: Career 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?