Skip to main content
Glama

Ergora HR and People Ops Specialist

ergora_hr
Read-onlyIdempotent

Ask the Ergora HR and People Ops specialist (hiring, culture, performance, employment). Returns summarised, cited insights from a curated knowledge base of practitioners, books and research.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoOptional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call.
queryYesThe question or topic to research (natural language).
top_kNoHow many insights to return (1-10).
subscribeNoOptional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / subscribe
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The user's email — unlocks the free tier (30 queries/day vs 5/day anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."New value: +"Optional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are summarised and cited from a curated knowledge base, but omits the anonymous-tier quota (5/day) that materially affects how an agent should use it — that constraint lives only in the email parameter's schema text.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the identity and scope front-loaded before the return behavior. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

For a read-only research tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description states the return shape (summarised, cited insights), which is the key thing an agent needs. It could be stronger by surfacing the quota/consumption behavior, since that is not obvious from the description alone.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (query, email, top_k, subscribe) are fully documented in the schema, including the free-tier unlock and the explicit-consent condition for subscribe. The description adds nothing parameter-specific, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb (ask) and resource (HR and People Ops specialist) and enumerates the domain scope (hiring, culture, performance, employment). Against 18 same-pattern siblings, the domain parenthetical is exactly what lets an agent separate it from ergora_leadership, ergora_legal, or ergora_ask without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The topic list implies when this tool is appropriate (HR/people questions), but there is no explicit when-not guidance or routing to alternatives such as ergora_leadership, ergora_business_strategy, or ergora_list_specialists. With 18 near-identical siblings, the absence of any disambiguation rule is a real gap, though domain keywords provide usable implied guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.