Skip to main content
Glama

GMPSignal Real-Time Intelligence MCP

greenhouse_cybersecurity_soc_hiring_monitor

Greenhouse Cybersecurity & Cloud SecOps Hiring Radar: Real-time structured data extraction feed for Greenhouse Cybersecurity & Cloud SecOps Hiring Radar.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "greenhouse_cybersecurity_soc_hiring_monitor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
maxResultsNoMaximum number of structured items to extract.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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, and it discloses nothing. It does not say whether the feed is live or cached, what fields are returned, whether results are paginated, or what 'real-time' actually means operationally.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The text is short but the second clause is a near-verbatim repetition of the first, so it wastes its only sentence on redundancy rather than on useful information. It is under-specified rather than concise.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and no description of returned data, an agent cannot tell what this tool actually yields or how it differs from the many sibling hiring/radar tools. For a data-extraction feed, the absence of any return-value or scope detail is a significant gap.

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 parameter (maxResults) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it fully. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case for high coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description restates the tool name almost verbatim: 'Real-time structured data extraction feed for Greenhouse Cybersecurity & Cloud SecOps Hiring Radar.' It conveys only that this is a data-extraction feed for cybersecurity hiring data, without a distinct verb+resource framing or any differentiation from the many sibling greenhouse_* hiring tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as greenhouse_ai_ml_engineering_jobs_radar or the other greenhouse hiring tools, and no stated preconditions. The only implied usage comes from the name itself, which is not sufficient 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.