BinaSmart MCP Server

Fields of work hiring now

list_job_fields

Read-only

Lists current BinaSmart job fields with open vacancy counts and top hiring cities, so you can pick a field or city filter before searching jobs.

Instructions

The fields of work with open vacancies on BinaSmart right now and how many are in each, plus the cities hiring most — useful before calling list_jobs with a field or city filter.

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": "list_job_fields"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cities`	No	Cities
`fields`	No	Job fields
`source_url`	No	bina.et page this result comes from; cite it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.2Oct 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "cities": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": true,
+            "properties": {
+              "city": {
+                "description": "City",
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "open_vacancies": {
+                "description": "Open vacancies",
+                "type": [
+                  "number",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Cities"
+    },
+    "fields": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": true,
+            "properties": {
+              "field": {
+                "description": "Field",
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "open_vacancies": {
+                "description": "Open vacancies",
+                "type": [
+                  "number",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "url": {
+                "description": "Page",
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Job fields"
+    },
+    "source_url": {
+      "description": "bina.et page this result comes from; cite it",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Oct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds some behavioral value by implying freshness ('right now') and an aggregated/ranked result shape, but it says nothing about result size limits, pagination, or caching of the counts.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler: the primary payload comes first, the secondary payload second, and the call-to-action last. Every clause earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema already describing the return shape, the description covers what is returned and when to reach for it. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no schema surface for the description to compensate for. No parameter claims are made or needed.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names the exact resource ('fields of work with open vacancies'), the aggregation ('how many are in each'), and the secondary payload ('cities hiring most'), so it is unmistakably not list_jobs or get_job. The only shortfall is that it is phrased as a noun clause rather than an explicit verb+resource statement, and the differentiation from list_jobs is delivered as usage advice rather than as a contrast.

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?

It names the sibling to use next ('useful before calling list_jobs with a field or city filter') and the condition that makes this tool the right first step, which is genuine routing guidance. It stops short of stating when not to call it (e.g., when the caller already knows the field).

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