Skip to main content
Glama
Thespaceblade

waas-mcp

by Thespaceblade
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Submit application

waas_submit_application

Submit job application answers with a dry-run preview. Checks quotas and login, stops for external or blocked applications, and requires your approval before final submission.

Instructions

Submit application answers. Pass a map of field names → values (see waas_inspect_application fields). Default dry_run=true. WORKFLOW (required):

  1. waas_application_quota (or waas_search weeklyQuota) — check remaining in-app applications this week (cap is 10).

  2. waas_search with structured filters (or waas_get_job from a URL the user provides).

  3. waas_get_job + waas_get_company for full context.

  4. waas_inspect_application — returns applicationType, fields[], weeklyQuota, applyBlocked.

  5. If applicationType=weekly_limit_reached or applyBlocked=true → stop; do NOT submit.

  6. If applicationType=external → report link/email to user; do NOT auto-submit.

  7. If applicationType=needs_login → tell user to run npm run login.

  8. Draft answers for every required field in fields[].

  9. waas_submit_application with dry_run=true — show the user all answers.

  10. Only after explicit approval → dry_run=false. Never auto-submit. Skip already_applied jobs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYes
answersYesField answers, e.g. { "message": "...", "question_1981": "...", "question_2839": "https://..." }
dry_runNoDefault true — preview only.
Install Server

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden, and it more than meets it: dry_run defaults to true, auto-submission is forbidden, explicit approval is required, weekly quota and applyBlocked are checked, and external/needs_login cases are handled. This is unusually clear about side effects and guardrails.

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?

Although long, the description is tightly structured: the one-line purpose is front-loaded, and the numbered workflow is dense with actionable instructions. The repetition of 'never auto-submit' and the approval requirement reinforces a critical safety rule rather than wasting space.

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?

The description is highly complete for pre-submission behavior, covering quota checks, context gathering, inspection, dry-run approval, and blocked cases. It does not describe the expected result or error behavior after a real dry_run=false submission, which would be useful given there is no output schema.

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?

The description adds meaning to 'answers' by pointing to waas_inspect_application fields and reinforces the dry_run default. However, job_id is only present in the schema and inferred from the workflow steps rather than explicitly described, leaving a small semantic gap.

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 clearly states the tool submits application answers and distinguishes it from sibling tools by referencing waas_inspect_application fields and the submission workflow. It also clarifies what this tool is not for: external applications, blocked/limit-reached applications, and login-required applications.

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?

The description provides a mandatory 10-step workflow that names the exact sibling tools to call before submission and specifies conditions that should stop the agent from submitting. It explicitly states when not to submit and requires explicit user approval before dry_run=false.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Thespaceblade/waas-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server