Bullhorn MCP Server and API by Cotlet

Add candidate note in Bullhorn

bullhorn_add_candidate_note

Read-onlyIdempotent

Add candidate note in the user's own Bullhorn account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Bullhorn step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Bullhorn Cloud Browser. Bullhorn's official API: Bullhorn has a REST API, but it is sold as a paid partner contract to technology vendors, not as a key for a recruiter or an agency (checked 23 Oct 2026).

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": "bullhorn_add_candidate_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is fully consistent with that: it opens nothing by itself and requires a separate browser tool to act. Beyond the annotations it adds the real operational constraint (output is a step-by-step procedure, execution happens elsewhere) and the API-licensing rationale. It does not describe the shape of the returned steps.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core behavior and the browser-tool handoff are front-loaded and earn their place. The closing sentence about Bullhorn's REST API being a paid partner contract, including a parenthetical check date, is tangential justification that pads the definition without changing how an agent invokes it.

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 input parameters and no output schema, the description must explain what comes back, and it does: step-by-step screens, buttons, and fields. The only gap is the format of those returned steps and whether they are tied to a specific candidate context, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the schema carries the entire parameter burden and there is nothing for the description to clarify. Baseline for a no-parameter tool applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The name suggests a write action, but the description explicitly reframes the tool as one that "Returns how to do it in Bullhorn step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself." That resolves the ambiguity and tells an agent this is an instruction generator, not a mutator, which is what distinguishes it from cotlet_browser_* siblings that actually perform the clicks.

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 states the use case (adding a candidate note) and the required follow-up path: take the returned steps and execute them with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Bullhorn Cloud Browser. The final sentence explains why the direct API route is unavailable, which reinforces when this tool is the right choice. It stops short of naming alternative Bullhorn note tools or exclusions.

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

All Bullhorn MCP Server and API by Cotlet 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?