Skip to main content
Glama

teamtailor_list_candidates

List and filter candidates from Teamtailor using pagination and date-based filters for creation or update timestamps.

Instructions

List and filter candidates.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageSizeNo
pageNo
filterNo

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:19-44 (registration)
    The tool 'teamtailor_list_candidates' is registered with the MCP server using server.tool(). It defines the schema (pageSize, page, filter) and handler callback.
    server.tool(
      "teamtailor_list_candidates",
      "List and filter candidates.",
      {
        pageSize: z.number().default(10),
        page: z.number().default(1),
        filter: z.object({
          createdAfter: z.string().optional(),
          createdBefore: z.string().optional(),
          updatedAfter: z.string().optional(),
          updatedBefore: z.string().optional(),
        }).optional(),
      },
      async ({ pageSize, page, filter}) => {
        const candidates = await client.listCandidates({ page, perPage: pageSize, filter });
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: JSON.stringify(candidates),
            }
          ]
        }
      }
    );
  • The handler function for teamtailor_list_candidates. It calls client.listCandidates() with pagination/filter params and returns the JSON-stringified result.
    async ({ pageSize, page, filter}) => {
      const candidates = await client.listCandidates({ page, perPage: pageSize, filter });
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(candidates),
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  • Input schema for the tool: pageSize (number, default 10), page (number, default 1), and an optional filter object with createdAfter, createdBefore, updatedAfter, updatedBefore strings.
    {
      pageSize: z.number().default(10),
      page: z.number().default(1),
      filter: z.object({
        createdAfter: z.string().optional(),
        createdBefore: z.string().optional(),
        updatedAfter: z.string().optional(),
        updatedBefore: z.string().optional(),
      }).optional(),
    },
  • The client.listCandidates() method that builds the /candidates URL with pagination and filter query params, then makes a GET request and returns the data.
    async listCandidates(params: ListCandidatesParams = {}): Promise<Candidate[]> {
      const url = new URL(`${this.baseUrl}/candidates`);
    
      this.addPaginationQueryParams(url, params);
    
      if (params?.filter?.createdAfter) {
        url.searchParams.append('filter[created-at][from]', params.filter.createdAfter);
      }
    
      if (params?.filter?.createdBefore) {
        url.searchParams.append('filter[created-at][to]', params.filter.createdBefore);
      }
    
      if (params?.filter?.updatedAfter) {
        url.searchParams.append('filter[updated-at][from]', params.filter.updatedAfter);
      }
    
      if (params?.filter?.updatedBefore) {
        url.searchParams.append('filter[updated-at][to]', params.filter.updatedBefore);
      }
    
      const body = await this.request<{ data: Candidate[] }>(url);
      return body.data;
    }
  • ListCandidatesParams interface defining the params shape used by the client.listCandidates() helper.
    export interface ListCandidatesParams {
      page?: number;
      perPage?: number;
      filter?: {
        createdAfter?: string;
        createdBefore?: string;
        updatedAfter?: string;
        updatedBefore?: string;
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or what happens when filters yield no results. The tool's mutability is unclear.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (4 words) but this is not conciseness; it is under-specification. Important details about parameters and behavior are omitted. A concise description would still cover essential aspects.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (nested filter object, pagination, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain return values, filtering syntax, or any other context needed for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no parameter details. It mentions 'filter' but does not explain the filter object's properties (createdAfter, etc.) or how pagination parameters work. This is insufficient for proper usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool lists and filters candidates, which is a clear verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'teamtailor_get_candidate', which likely retrieves a single candidate. The purpose is clear but lacks specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tool exists but is not mentioned, and there is no context about appropriate scenarios or preconditions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/crunchloop/mcp-teamtailor'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server