Dice MCP

Get Company

get_company

Read-only

Retrieve the name and description of the company behind a job, by job ID.

Use this tool when users want more detail about a company than search_jobs/get_job_details return (e.g. after finding a job and wanting to know more about the company that posted it). DO NOT use for: searching/discovering companies or jobs by keyword (use search_jobs instead).

LLM USAGE INSTRUCTIONS:

The typical flow is: search_jobs to find jobs -> user picks one -> offer to look up the company -> if the user agrees, call this tool with that same job_id (the same guid used for get_job_details; no separate lookup step is needed first).
Do not call this automatically right after get_job_details; ask the user first unless they already explicitly asked for company details.
Not every company has published an employer branding profile, and some profiles are marked not visible by the company. When that happens this tool does NOT raise — it returns a Company with message set and empty name/desc. Relay that message to the user (e.g. "Looks like that company hasn't published a public profile.") rather than treating it as an error.

Args: job_id: The unique identifier of the job whose company to look up (required). This must be the job's guid field from a search_jobs result, NOT its id field — id is a different, internal identifier that this tool does not accept.

Returns: Company: Contains: - name: The company name (empty if message is set) - desc: The company description (empty if message is set) - message: Set instead of name/desc when there is no visible company profile to show; None when name/desc are populated

Raises: Exception: If the job is not found, an API call itself fails (network error, non-200 response, GraphQL errors), or input validation errors occur

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`desc`	No	The company description
`name`	No	The company name
`message`	No	Set instead of name/desc when there is no visible company profile to show (e.g. the company hasn't published one, or has marked it not visible). None when name/desc are populated.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses that the tool does not raise exceptions for missing company profiles but returns a Company with a message, and explains that job_id must be guid not id, adding context beyond annotations which only mark readOnlyHint and destructiveHint.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections, but slightly verbose due to extensive LLM instructions and edge cases. Could be more concise while preserving essential details.

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?

Covers all aspects: parameter, return type, error handling, edge case of missing profile, and alignment with typical workflow, despite having only 1 parameter and no schema descriptions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% coverage, but the description fully explains the job_id parameter, specifying it must be the job's guid field, not its id, and that it is required, adding crucial semantic info beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the company name and description by job ID, distinguishing it from siblings search_jobs and get_job_details which return job listings or details without company info.

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 guides when to use (after finding a job, when user wants company detail) and when not (searching/discovering), provides a typical flow, and includes LLM usage instructions with cautions about auto-calling.

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

All Dice MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: search_jobs discovers job listings, get_job_details returns the full description and skills for a specific job, and get_company retrieves company details for a job. There is no overlap in purpose, and descriptions explicitly clarify when to use each tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: search_jobs, get_job_details, get_company. The verbs are semantically appropriate (search for discovery, get for retrieval) and the pattern is uniform across the set.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is a well-scoped, focused set for a read-only job search MCP. Each tool earns its place in the search → details → company flow, and the count falls comfortably within the typical 3-15 range.

Completeness4/5

The core user journey is covered: searching for jobs, viewing full job details, and looking up company information. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no company search or application submission tools), but these are explicitly outside the stated purpose, so the surface is adequate for the domain.

Resources

Need Help?