Skip to main content
Glama

MCP-iQuesta

by io.github.iQuesta

search_jobs

Recherche des offres de stage, alternance, emploi ou job étudiant sur iQuesta.com. Pour filtrer par région, discipline ou type de contrat, appeler d'abord list_filters pour obtenir les IDs valides — ne jamais deviner un ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termNoMots-clés recherchés dans le titre de l'annonce (ex: 'développeur web', 'assistant marketing', 'ressources humaines')
beginNoMois de début souhaité de la mission, de 1 (Janvier) à 12 (Décembre). Omettre si aucune contrainte de date.
limitNoNombre maximum de résultats à retourner (défaut: 15, max recommandé: 20)
regionsNoID de région française, obtenu via list_filters(filter='regions'). Exemple : 10 pour Ile de France, 6 pour Bretagne. Toujours vérifier la liste complète avant de choisir un ID, ne jamais deviner.
durationNoDurée maximale de la mission en mois (ex: 3, 6, 12, 24). Omettre si aucune contrainte de durée.
matieresNoListe d'IDs de matières, obtenus via list_filters(filter='matieres'). Plus précis que 'disciplines' (ex: 'Développement web' plutôt que 'Informatique'). Toujours vérifier la liste complète avant de choisir un ID, ne jamais deviner.
contractsNoID du type de contrat, obtenu via list_filters(filter='contracts'). Valeurs possibles : '1' (Stage), '2' (Contrat en alternance), '-4' (Emploi), '-5' (Job étudiant). Omettre pour rechercher tous types confondus.
descriptionNoMots-clés recherchés dans le texte/descriptif complet de l'annonce (missions, compétences requises, etc.). À utiliser pour cibler des compétences ou détails précis absents du titre.
disciplinesNoID de discipline, obtenu via list_filters(filter='disciplines'). Exemple : 9 pour Informatique, 5 pour Economie/Gestion/Commerce. Toujours vérifier la liste complète avant de choisir un ID, ne jamais deviner.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or any rate limits or authentication requirements. The only implied behavioral trait is that it is a search operation, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 description is a single sentence with an additional warning, which is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It could be structured slightly better (e.g., separating the usage guidance), but overall it is efficient and earned its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the 9 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides adequate context on tool purpose and prerequisite usage. However, it lacks information about return format, pagination, error handling, or what happens when no results are found, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the detailed schema descriptions for each parameter (e.g., term, begin, limit, regions, etc.). The main added value is the guidance on using list_filters, which is not parameter-specific.

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 explicitly states that the tool searches for job offers (stage, alternance, emploi, or job étudiant) on iQuesta.com, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like get_job and list_filters by describing its filtering capabilities and the prerequisite call to list_filters.

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 clearly instructs users to call list_filters first to obtain valid IDs for filtering by region, discipline, or contract type, and warns against guessing IDs. This provides clear context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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

All MCP-iQuesta toolsInspect
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: get_job retrieves a specific job, list_filters provides valid filter IDs, and search_jobs searches for jobs. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use verb_noun snake_case naming (get_job, list_filters, search_jobs), consistent in style and pattern.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the set is minimal but covers the core workflow of searching and viewing jobs. It is on the lower end of acceptable for a job search server.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers searching with filters and fetching details. Minor gaps include no sorting or date filtering, but the essential CRUD for job viewing is present.

Resources