FoundRole Jobs - AI Job Search & Application Tracker

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get job details

jobs_details

Retrieves complete job details by ID from search results, including description, skills, benefits, salary, and application link.

Instructions

Fetches full details for one job by the id returned from jobs_search — the deeper view behind a search result.

Input:

job_id: The exact ID string from the id field of a jobs_search result.
result_item_id: The matching occurrence ID from that result's resultItemId field, when available.

Output: Complete job details: description, skills, benefits, requirements, salary benchmark, resume match, H-1B and E-Verify signals, job-trust analysis, and application link. A posting that passed the fully-remote check carries remoteCheck: the posting lines that make the role remote and where the employee may work from, or an unknown scope when the posting does not say. Personalized and extended insight fields follow the authenticated user's current entitlements.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job_id`	Yes	The unique identifier of the job from jobs_search results
`result_item_id`	No	The result occurrence ID returned with the selected job

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job`	No
`studioUrl`	No
`trackedJob`	No
`statusOrder`	No
`trackerWebUrl`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv1.1.16Sep 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / result_item_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The result occurrence ID returned with the selected job",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / estimatedSalary / properties / basedOn
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": [
-    "string",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / estimatedSalary / properties / currency
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / remoteCheck

Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "quotes": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "source": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "text": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "workFrom": {
+      "properties": {
+        "allowedPlaces": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "excludedPlaces": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "quotes": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "source": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "text": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "scope": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": [
+    "object",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / resultItemId

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / studioUrl

Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

First observedv1.1.9Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, yet the description describes a pure fetch — a mild tension worth noting, though not a hard contradiction since personalization/entitlement resolution can be non-read-only. The description does add real context beyond annotations (entitlement-dependent fields, the remoteCheck payload semantics), but it does not clarify auth requirements or why the tool is not read-only.

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 the core action, then cleanly separated into Input and Output blocks that are easy to scan. It is slightly long, but the Output section carries non-obvious information (entitlement gating, remoteCheck shape) rather than filler.

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?

With an output schema present, the description is not obligated to enumerate return fields, yet it still summarizes them usefully and clarifies the conditional remoteCheck field. Missing only auth/entitlement prerequisites for a tool whose results vary by the authenticated user.

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, and the description earns an increment by tying each parameter to its originating field in a jobs_search result (`id` and `resultItemId`), which the schema itself does not establish. It adds genuine cross-tool semantics rather than restating types.

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+resource ('Fetches full details for one job') and explicitly anchors it to the `id` returned from jobs_search. An agent can distinguish it from jobs_search, jobs_compare, and jobs_analyze_external without opening any schema.

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?

Frames the tool as 'the deeper view behind a search result,' which implies the correct usage sequence (search first, then fetch details by ID). It does not state exclusions or name a competing sibling for retrieving a single job, so it stops short of the explicit when/when-not guidance a 5 requires.

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