Skip to main content
Glama
benmonopoli

Greenhouse MCP

by benmonopoli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_applications

Retrieve applications with optional filters by job, candidate, status, or date to view applicants for a role or track submissions.

Instructions

List applications with optional filters. Read-only.

Users say "show me applications for [job name]" or "what came in this week." To filter by job: list_jobs → find by name → use its job_id. To filter by candidate: search_candidates_by_name → candidate_id. Each application has job_id + job_name, the current stage (stage_name, and job_interview_stage_id for moves), status ('in_process', 'rejected', 'hired', 'converted'), source_id, recruiter_id/coordinator_id, rejection_reason_id and created_at (the applied date). For pipeline views grouped by stage, use pipeline_summary. For stale candidates, use stale_applications or candidates_needing_action.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cursorNoPass next_cursor from the previous response to get the next page
job_idNoFilter to applications on this job
statusNoFilter by status: 'active', 'rejected', 'hired', or 'converted'
paginateNo'single' for one page, 'all' to auto-fetch every pagesingle
per_pageNoResults per page (max 500)
candidate_idNoFilter to applications for this candidate
created_afterNoISO 8601 datetime — only applications created at/after this
created_beforeNoISO 8601 datetime — only applications created before this
last_activity_afterNoISO 8601 datetime — only applications with activity after this

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed10 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / candidate_id / description
      Added value: +"Filter to applications for this candidate"
    • addedInput schema / properties / created_after / description
      Added value: +"ISO 8601 datetime — only applications created at/after this"
    • addedInput schema / properties / created_before / description
      Added value: +"ISO 8601 datetime — only applications created before this"
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Pass next_cursor from the previous response to get the next page",
+  "title": "Cursor"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / job_id / description
      Added value: +"Filter to applications on this job"
    • addedInput schema / properties / last_activity_after / description
      Added value: +"ISO 8601 datetime — only applications with activity after this"
    • removedInput schema / properties / page
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": 1,
-  "title": "Page",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / paginate / description
      Added value: +"'single' for one page, 'all' to auto-fetch every page"
    • addedInput schema / properties / per_page / description
      Added value: +"Results per page (max 500)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Added value: +"Filter by status: 'active', 'rejected', 'hired', or 'converted'"
  2. Addedv0.3.4

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does declare 'Read-only' up front along with the semantics of the returned records (stage, status values, ids, created_at). It does not address auth/permission needs or rate limits, but for a non-destructive list tool the safety profile is adequately disclosed.

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 safety, then routing and workflow, so the important parts come first. The mid-section enumerating application fields partially duplicates the existing output schema, which is slightly wasteful, but the routing content earns its space.

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?

Covers usage, alternatives, and ID-acquisition workflows for a 9-parameter tool, and an output schema already documents the return shape. The field enumeration is redundant against that output schema but nothing critical for correct invocation 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; the description goes beyond by explaining how to derive job_id and candidate_id, and clarifies that created_at is the applied date. Minor risk: it lists status values as 'in_process' while the schema filter documents 'active', a potential confusion worth flagging.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List applications with optional filters') and immediately scopes it as 'Read-only'. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming pipeline_summary, stale_applications, and candidates_needing_action as different tools for different views.

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 concrete trigger phrases ('show me applications for [job name]', 'what came in this week') and spells out the prerequisite workflows to obtain filters (list_jobs → find by name → job_id; search_candidates_by_name → candidate_id). It also names the alternatives to use for pipeline-by-stage and stale-candidate questions, covering when-not-to-use.

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