Rynda Crewing

Vacancy details

get_vacancy

Read-onlyIdempotent

Full public details of one vacancy: description, requirements (sea service, languages, certificates, visas), vessel particulars, benefits, contract and pay, the employer and how to apply. Accepts the id or the url returned by search_vacancies. A vacancy that is closed is reported as not found.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_vacancy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Vacancy id ("1234" or "ext-5678") or the vacancy url.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. Beyond them, the description discloses the payload contents and, importantly, the error semantics for closed vacancies (returned as not found rather than an empty record), which is behavior an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and contents, then input source, then the closed-vacancy edge case. The parenthetical field list is dense rather than redundant, and nothing repeats the title or annotations.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and stating the not-found behavior for closed vacancies. Combined with annotations covering safety and idempotency, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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?

With 100% schema coverage the schema already explains that id accepts an id or url, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by specifying provenance — the url is "returned by search_vacancies" — which tells the agent where to obtain a valid identifier, a small but genuine addition.

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?

"Full public details of one vacancy" names a specific verb, resource and scope, then enumerates exactly what is included (description, requirements, vessel particulars, benefits, contract and pay, employer, application). Sibling differentiation is implicit but strong: search_vacancies produces the id/url that this tool consumes, and this tool returns the full record while search returns candidates.

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?

The description establishes the intended workflow by saying the id/url comes from search_vacancies, and it documents the closed-vacancy edge case (reported as not found). What's missing is an explicit "use this when you need details on a single vacancy, not a list" statement or any exclusion beyond the closed case, so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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

All Rynda Crewing 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?