Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Job Spotter

by io.github.GoodTurnStudio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

What would make this application stronger before it goes

strengthen_application
Read-onlyIdempotent

What would make this application stronger before it goes. Before apply, or when the person asks "is this good enough?". Compares the advert with the tailored CV and the person's own CV (skills the advert asks for that the CV leaves out, years asked for, results without numbers), checks the cover letter (blanks, the company named, length, stock phrases, the strongest matches mentioned) and the employer's questions (unanswered or too short). Suggestions come most important first. A ready-to-read summary is in say.

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": {
      "application_id": "<application_id>"
    },
    "name": "strengthen_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
application_idYesThe application id (app_...) from prepare_application or list_applications.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this a safe, read-only, idempotent operation, so the description does not need to argue safety. Instead it adds real behavioural context: exactly what gets compared, that suggestions are ordered most-important-first, and that a ready-to-read summary appears in `say`. The absence of any note on what happens with a thin or missing CV/cover letter is the only meaningful gap.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first clause and the details follow in a logical order: what is compared, what is checked, how output is ordered, where the summary lives. The parenthetical lists are dense and slightly run-on, but each item carries real information rather than filler.

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?

Against a no-output-schema tool, the description usefully tells the agent that a prose summary lands in `say` and that findings are prioritised. It also enumerates the three review surfaces, which is enough for an agent to know what to expect. Only edge-case behaviour is unaddressed.

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?

There is a single required parameter and the schema already documents it fully at 100% coverage, including where the app_... id comes from. The description adds no extra meaning about the identifier or its behaviour. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the semantics.

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 description makes clear this is a pre-submission review tool: it compares the advert against the tailored CV and the person's own CV, checks the cover letter and the employer's questions, and returns prioritised suggestions. That is a specific verb-plus-resource picture an agent can act on. It does not name a sibling directly, but the 'before apply' framing separates it from apply and edit_application well enough.

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 gives two concrete triggers: before applying, or when the person asks 'is this good enough?'. That is clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly positions it as a pre-flight check rather than a submission step. It stops short of stating when not to use it or naming the sibling to use instead for editing or fetching, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Job Spotter toolsInspect
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