AI Applyd

Approve or Reject Applications

aiapplyd_review_application

Destructive

Instructions

Act on the user's applications. decision "approve" submits each waiting application on the employer's hiring system under the user's name. This cannot be undone. "reject" skips it, and nothing is sent. "cancel" stops one that is still queued or preparing. "refine" rewrites its resume or cover letter from instructions (document_type and instructions). "re_prepare" builds its documents again (optional steps). "set_stage" records how it is going (stage). Pass up to 25 application_ids from aiapplyd_get_applications. Only approve on the user's explicit go-ahead, such as a "yes" to a specific application. On a timeout or an error, call aiapplyd_get_applications before retrying; an approve that already went through is reported as already approved. Do not use it for matches with no application yet; use aiapplyd_apply or aiapplyd_triage_matches. Next: aiapplyd_get_applications to follow the submissions. Besides application_ids: approve, reject and cancel need nothing else; refine needs document_type and instructions; set_stage needs stage; re_prepare takes optional steps.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stage`	No	For set_stage: applied, callback, phone_screen, interview, offered, rejected or no_response.
`steps`	No	For re_prepare: the steps to run again. Omit to run every step that is out of date.
`decision`	Yes	"approve" submits the application to the employer and cannot be undone. "reject" skips it and sends nothing. "cancel" stops a queued one. "refine" rewrites a document (needs document_type and instructions). "re_prepare" builds its documents again. "set_stage" records the stage (needs stage).
`instructions`	No	For refine: what to change, in the user's own words (up to 2,000 characters).
`document_type`	No	For refine: "resume" or "cover_letter".
`application_ids`	Yes	Application ids to act on, 1 to 25 (e.g. [1550, 1551]), from aiapplyd_get_applications

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`results`	Yes
`decision`	Yes
`attempted`	Yes
`succeeded`	Yes
`notConfirmed`	Yes	True when the user declined the confirmation prompt and nothing was sent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedv1.8.5Oct 12, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / applicationStage / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / applicationStage / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / reason / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / reason / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / refinedContent / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / refinedContent / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / status / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / status / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
Addedv1.8.0Sep 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint=false) by naming which decisions are irreversible ('approve ... cannot be undone'), what reject does to the applicant ('nothing is sent'), and how a duplicate approve manifests ('an approve that already went through is reported as already approved'), which is exactly the idempotency nuance the annotation only flags abstractly.

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?

Front-loads the destructive approve behavior and the per-decision effects before the constraints, so the highest-risk information lands first. It is dense and slightly run-on as a single block, with mild redundancy between the decision enumeration and the closing parameter restatement, but nearly every clause carries operational weight.

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?

For a six-parameter, six-mode mutation tool with an output schema already present, the description covers the batch limit (up to 25 ids), the id source, error/timeout recovery, irreversibility, prerequisites, and the next step. Nothing needed to call it correctly 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, but the final sentence adds a decision-to-parameter mapping the schema cannot express ('approve, reject and cancel need nothing else; refine needs document_type and instructions; set_stage needs stage; re_prepare takes optional steps'). It also states the batch cap and id provenance, though it does not explain refine instructions semantics beyond 'in the user's own words'.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Act on the user's applications') and then enumerates each of the six decision values with the concrete effect of each. It explicitly distinguishes itself from aiapplyd_apply and aiapplyd_triage_matches, so an agent can route 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('Only approve on the user's explicit go-ahead, such as a "yes" to a specific application'), when-not ('Do not use it for matches with no application yet'), named alternatives (aiapplyd_apply, aiapplyd_triage_matches), a retry protocol after timeout/error, and a follow-up tool.

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