Skip to main content
Glama
benmonopoli

Greenhouse MCP

by benmonopoli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create_interview

Records a scheduled interview for a candidate's application, linking interviewers, start/end times, and location. Logs the interview in Greenhouse without sending calendar invites.

Instructions

Record a scheduled interview for an application. Write operation.

Users say "schedule an interview for Sarah on the Backend role." To get application_id: search_candidates_by_name → list_applications(candidate_id=...) → match app. For interviewer_ids: list_users → match by name. interview_id is the job interview from list_job_stages_for_job (interviews[].id). This records the interview in Greenhouse; it does not send calendar invites.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesEnd time as ISO 8601, e.g. '2024-03-15T11:00:00Z'
startYesStart time as ISO 8601, e.g. '2024-03-15T10:00:00Z'
locationNoRoom, address, or meeting link
interview_idYesJob interview ID (the interview on the job's plan) — from list_job_stages_for_job → stage interviews[].id
application_idYesApplication to schedule the interview for
interviewer_idsYesUser IDs of interviewers — get from list_users
external_event_idNoID of the matching event on the organizer's calendar (Google/Outlook). A placeholder is generated if omitted
video_conferencing_urlNoVideo call join URL

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / application_id / description
      Added value: +"Application to schedule the interview for"
    • addedInput schema / properties / end / description
      Added value: +"End time as ISO 8601, e.g. '2024-03-15T11:00:00Z'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / external_event_id
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "ID of the matching event on the organizer's calendar (Google/Outlook). A placeholder is generated if omitted",
+  "title": "External Event Id"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / interview_id / description
      Added value: +"Job interview ID (the interview on the job's plan) — from list_job_stages_for_job → stage interviews[].id"
    • addedInput schema / properties / interviewer_ids / description
      Added value: +"User IDs of interviewers — get from list_users"
    • addedInput schema / properties / location
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Room, address, or meeting link",
+  "title": "Location"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / start / description
      Added value: +"Start time as ISO 8601, e.g. '2024-03-15T10:00:00Z'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / video_conferencing_url
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Video call join URL",
+  "title": "Video Conferencing Url"
+}
  2. Addedv0.3.4

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, and it does the important part: it states this is a write operation and that it "does not send calendar invites," which prevents a false expectation of outbound notifications. It omits permission requirements, whether duplicate scheduling is possible, and any rate/validation constraints, so it is good but not exhaustive.

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?

Purpose and write-operation warning are front-loaded in the first two sentences, followed by compact ID-resolution recipes. It is terse to the point of being telegraphic, but every sentence carries operational information and nothing is padded.

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?

For an 8-parameter mutation tool this covers the crucial gaps: how to obtain the otherwise opaque IDs and the explicit absence of calendar-invite side effects. An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not needed, though scheduling-conflict or permission behavior remains unaddressed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the derivation for application_id, interviewer_ids, and interview_id, but the schema already documents those same sources (list_users, list_job_stages_for_job → interviews[].id), so it adds little beyond the structured fields.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ("Record a scheduled interview for an application") and explicitly labels it a write operation, which cleanly separates it from the read-oriented siblings get_interview, list_interviews, and list_interviews_for_application, and from delete_interview/update_interview.

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 gives a concrete user-intent trigger ("schedule an interview for Sarah on the Backend role") and step-by-step ID-resolution recipes for application_id, interviewer_ids, and interview_id, so the agent knows the prerequisite lookups. It stops short of explicitly naming alternative tools or stating when NOT to use this (e.g., reschedule vs. create), so it is strong but not fully routing-aware.

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