Greenhouse MCP

list_scorecards

Fetch read-only interview scorecards across all applications to review candidate ratings, notes, and interviewer feedback. Filter by status or date, with optional details.

Instructions

List interview scorecards across all applications. Read-only.

Each scorecard has application_id, candidate_rating (also as overall_recommendation), notes, status, interviewed_at, submitted_at and, with include_details, interviewer/submitted_by {id, name, email}, interview name, attributes [{name, rating, note}], ratings grouped by rating, and questions [{question, answer}]. v3 scorecards carry no candidate_id — use application_id. For a specific candidate, use list_scorecards_for_application (search_candidates_by_name → list_applications(candidate_id=...) → match application → use its ID).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cursor`	No	Pass next_cursor from the previous response to get the next page
`status`	No	'complete' for submitted scorecards, 'draft' for drafts
`paginate`	No	'single' for one page, 'all' to auto-fetch every page	single
`per_page`	No	Results per page (max 500)
`created_after`	No	ISO 8601 datetime — only scorecards created at/after this
`created_before`	No	ISO 8601 datetime — only scorecards created before this
`include_details`	No	Resolve interviewer, interview, attribute ratings and question answers (extra calls; set false for faster bulk listing)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedv0.5.0Oct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / created_after / description

Added value: +"ISO 8601 datetime — only scorecards created at/after this"

addedInput schema / properties / created_before / description

Added value: +"ISO 8601 datetime — only scorecards 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 / include_details

Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "Resolve interviewer, interview, attribute ratings and question answers (extra calls; set false for faster bulk listing)",
+  "title": "Include Details",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

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

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "'complete' for submitted scorecards, 'draft' for drafts",
+  "title": "Status"
+}

Addedv0.3.4Apr 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden and does so by declaring 'Read-only.' It also discloses a behavioral quirk that matters (v3 scorecards carry no candidate_id — use application_id) and enumerates what fields appear, including the conditional fields gated by include_details. It stops short of describing pagination or rate-limit behavior, but the core traits are covered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and routing are front-loaded, which is good, but the middle sentence is a long enumeration of returned fields (application_id, candidate_rating, notes, status, timestamps, interviewer, attributes, questions, etc.). Since an output schema exists, this return-value catalogue is largely wasted text rather than earning its place.

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?

Given the tool is a straightforward list with a 100% documented schema and an existing output schema, the description covers the essentials: purpose, read-only nature, the application_id caveat, and sibling routing. The only redundancy is re-listing return fields that the output schema already defines.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter (cursor, status, paginate, per_page, created_after/before, include_details) is already documented in the schema. The description's note that include_details adds interviewer/interview/attribute/question fields is largely redundant with the schema's own description, so it adds little beyond baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (List), resource (interview scorecards), and scope (across all applications), and explicitly names the sibling it is not: 'For a specific candidate, use list_scorecards_for_application.' An agent can distinguish it from the sibling without opening a 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this tool for listing across all applications, and for a specific candidate use list_scorecards_for_application, even providing the discovery chain (search_candidates_by_name → list_applications(candidate_id=...) → match application). The when-not and alternative are both spelled out.

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

Deploy Server