CV Email MCP Server

parse_cv

Parse and load CV content from a PDF file. Provide the PDF path to extract resume details for further processing.

Instructions

Parse and load CV content from PDF file

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": "parse_cv"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pdf_path`	No	Path to the PDF file (optional, uses default if not provided)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only offers a high-level action. It does not explain what 'load' means in practice, whether any state changes occur, error handling, supported PDF formats, or the return behavior. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely has side effects.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. There is no redundant information or fluff, making it efficiently structured for a tool description.

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?

Given that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should clarify what the tool returns or accomplishes. It only says 'Parse and load CV content' without explaining the outcome, the relationship to sibling tools, or any caveats. This leaves the agent under-informed about the tool's behavior and integration context.

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?

The schema already provides a complete description for the sole parameter (pdf_path: 'Path to the PDF file (optional, uses default if not provided)'), so the schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail about the parameter beyond what the schema has, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Parse and load') and the resource ('CV content from PDF file'), which distinguishes it from the sibling ask_cv tool. However, 'load' is somewhat vague—it does not specify whether the content is stored, returned, or made available for subsequent queries.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit usage guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The intended use is implied by the name 'parse_cv' (ingestion) versus sibling 'ask_cv' (querying), but the description does not state when to use this tool instead of the siblings or any prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server