Skip to main content
Glama
benmonopoli

Greenhouse MCP

by benmonopoli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_candidate

Retrieve a candidate's full profile by ID, including contact info, applications, attachments, education, and employment history. Use as the central lookup after finding a name via search.

Instructions

Get a candidate's full profile by ID. Read-only.

Returns name, contact info, tags, custom fields, plus (fetched alongside, since v3 no longer embeds them) applications (each with id, job_id, job_name, stage_name, job_interview_stage_id, status), attachments (with time-limited download URLs), educations (with school/degree/discipline names) and employments. This is the central lookup — most workflows route through here after resolving a name via search_candidates_by_name. For a screening package with resume and location, use screen_candidate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
candidate_idYesGreenhouse candidate ID
include_relatedNoAlso fetch applications, attachments, educations and employments (default true; false returns the bare profile)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / candidate_id / description
      Added value: +"Greenhouse candidate ID"
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_related
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "Also fetch applications, attachments, educations and employments (default true; false returns the bare profile)",
+  "title": "Include Related",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Addedv0.3.4

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well: it declares 'Read-only', notes the v3 change that applications are no longer embedded but fetched alongside, and warns that attachment download URLs are time-limited. It omits any auth/permission requirements, but for a read tool the disclosure is substantially richer than the structured fields alone.

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-loaded with purpose and read-only status, then a scannable list of returned entities. The return enumeration is somewhat long and partially redundant given an output schema exists, but the time-limited-URL note and the routing sentence earn their 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 get-by-ID tool with a full output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers read-only status, related-data fetching behavior, and workflow positioning. Nothing an agent needs 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.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both candidate_id and include_related (including its default and false-behavior) are already documented. The description never explicitly discusses include_related, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema — the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get a candidate's full profile by ID') and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming search_candidates_by_name (name resolution) and screen_candidate (screening package). An agent can identify the tool's role 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?

It gives explicit routing guidance ('most workflows route through here after resolving a name via search_candidates_by_name') and states the alternative for a different need ('For a screening package with resume and location, use screen_candidate'). Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are covered.

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