Greenhouse MCP

list_email_templates

Retrieve all email templates and resolve template names to IDs, filtered by type, to find the rejection template ID needed when rejecting a candidate.

Instructions

List all email templates. Read-only.

Resolves template names to IDs. When a user wants to send a rejection email, use this (email_type='candidate_rejection') to find the template ID for reject_application's rejection_email parameter.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cursor`	No	Pass next_cursor from the previous response to get the next page
`per_page`	No	Results per page (max 500)
`email_type`	No	Filter by type, e.g. candidate_rejection, candidate_email
`force_refresh`	No	Bypass cache and fetch fresh data

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.5.0Oct 5, 2026

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 / email_type

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Filter by type, e.g. candidate_rejection, candidate_email",
+  "title": "Email Type"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / force_refresh / description
```
Added value: +"Bypass cache and fetch fresh data"
```

removedInput schema / properties / page

Removed value: -{
-  "default": 1,
-  "title": "Page",
-  "type": "integer"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / per_page / description
```
Added value: +"Results per page (max 500)"
```

Addedv0.3.4Apr 15, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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. It correctly declares 'Read-only,' which is the most important safety trait, but it does not discuss pagination behavior, caching, force_refresh effects, or authorization requirements.

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 front-loaded with the core action and read-only status, then briefly covers resolution and a concrete workflow. Every sentence adds value and there is no wasted wording.

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 a read-only list tool with a rich schema and an output schema, the description provides enough to select and call it correctly. Minor omissions around pagination and cache behavior are largely covered by structured fields, but would have been useful given the absence of annotations.

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 already 100%, so the schema documents all four parameters well. The description reinforces email_type with a concrete example, but adds no meaning for cursor, per_page, or force_refresh beyond what the schema already provides.

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 all email templates') and adds the purpose of resolving template names to IDs. This distinguishes it from single-template siblings like get_email_template and makes its output role clear.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance by connecting the tool to rejection-email workflows and naming the downstream parameter on reject_application. It does not state when not to use it or compare it with get_email_template, but the primary usage context is clear.

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

Deploy Server