Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HireLayer MCP server

HireLayer MCP server

by HireLayer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Talent Pool Search

search_resumes

Find resumes closest to a job by similarity, returning application IDs, scores, and scoring status; pass promising matches to score_resumes for evaluation.

Instructions

Find the resumes of the user's resume database closest to a job, by proximity only: application_ids with a similarity between 0 and 1, best first, and whether each is already scored for the job. No evaluation: pass the ones worth it to score_resumes. Give the job as the job_id of a stored job or as job_text (at least 30 characters; the job is then stored). Costs 1 HireLayer credit per search.

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": "search_resumes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoKeep the resumes located around this city. Resumes without a known location are left out.
limitNoHow many resumes to return, 50 by default.
job_idNoA stored job. Give job_id or job_text.
job_textNoA job description not stored yet, at least 30 characters.
radius_kmNoAround the city, 30 km by default.
workspaceNoThe client company this call belongs to, when the user recruits for several companies: its HireLayer workspace id (letters, digits and . _ : ~ -, up to 200 characters), e.g. acme-corp. Jobs, resumes and scores stay apart from other clients'. A new id creates a new workspace, so reuse the exact id. Omit it for the user's default workspace.
added_afterNoKeep the resumes added after this date (ISO 8601).
country_codeNoThe city's country, ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 such as FR.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds context annotations cannot carry: the credit cost ('1 HireLayer credit per search') and the side effect that a job_text search stores the job — which explains why readOnlyHint is false for a search tool. It also discloses the result ordering and the per-result scored flag, giving the agent enough to reason about both cost and follow-up calls.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does, then the routing rule, then the input form and cost. Every clause carries operative information — no restatement of the title or name.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description covers the return shape (ranked ids with similiarity and scored flag), the input mode choice, the side effect, and the cost. For an 8-parameter, open-world search with a write side effect, nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above baseline by stating the job_id/job_text choice and the consequence of job_text ('the job is then stored') plus the 30-character floor. It adds no guidance on city/country_code/radius_km/added_after, but the schema documents those thoroughly.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find the resumes ... closest to a job') and immediately bounds the semantics ('by proximity only'), which separates it from score_resumes. It also tells the agent what comes back (application_ids with a 0-1 similarity, best first, already-scored flag), so the tool's identity is unambiguous without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says 'No evaluation: pass the the ones worth it to score_resumes', naming the sibling and the handoff condition. That is a direct when-to-use / when-not-to-use split rather than implied guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools