FoundRole Jobs - AI Job Search & Application Tracker

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Save a job to the tracker

tracker_add

Save a job from jobs_search results to your job tracker by job_id, with an initial status, sub-status, and notes for application tracking.

Instructions

Tracks a job from jobs_search results in the user's job tracker, identified by its job_id. For a job found elsewhere on the open web (with a URL but no jobs_search job_id), tracker_add_external is the right tool instead.

Fields:

job_id: the job ID from jobs_search results (required)
status: initial status (saved, applied, interviewing, offered, archived); defaults to "saved"
sub_status: sub-status within the main status: saved: interested, researching_company, preparing_application, ready_to_apply; applied: application_submitted, followed_up; interviewing: interview_scheduled, phone_screen, technical, onsite, final_round, pending_feedback; offered: negotiating, considering, offer_received, accepted; archived: ghosted, rejected_by_company, withdrawn_by_candidate, not_interested, employed_by_this_company, employed_by_another_company
notes: notes about the job

Returns the tracked job with its details. Repeated saves return the existing tracked job. A job that was previously removed from the tracker is restored with its earlier status and notes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No	Notes about this job
`job_id`	Yes	The job ID from jobs.search results
`status`	No	Initial tracking status: saved, applied, interviewing, offered, archived
`sub_status`	No	Sub-status within the main status, valid only for that status — saved: interested, researching_company, preparing_application, ready_to_apply; applied: application_submitted, followed_up; interviewing: interview_scheduled, phone_screen, technical, onsite, final_round, pending_feedback; offered: negotiating, considering, offer_received, accepted; archived: ghosted, rejected_by_company, withdrawn_by_candidate, not_interested, employed_by_this_company, employed_by_another_company
`result_item_id`	No	The result occurrence ID returned with the selected job

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hasMore`	No
`totalCount`	No
`trackedJob`	No
`statusOrder`	No
`trackedJobs`	No
`trackerWebUrl`	No
`subStatusOrder`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field 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"
+}

First observedv1.1.9Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so safety is already covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: repeated saves are idempotent ('return the existing tracked job') and a previously removed job is restored with its earlier status and notes. It does not clarify whether a new status/sub_status passed on a repeated save overrides the stored one, which is a minor gap.

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 purpose and the routing rule, then a scannable field list. The main inefficiency is the full sub_status enumeration, which duplicates the schema text verbatim and consumes a large share of the description without adding meaning.

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?

An output schema exists and the description still summarizes the return ('Returns the tracked job with its details'), and the mutation's idempotency/restore behavior is disclosed. What is missing is any steer toward the related mutation siblings (tracker_update, tracker_update_status) that an agent would need when the job already exists.

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, but the description adds the default value for status ('defaults to "saved"'), which the schema does not state. It also omits any mention of result_item_id (present in the schema) and mostly restates the status/sub_status enumerations verbatim.

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 and resource ('Tracks a job from jobs_search results in the user's job tracker, identified by its job_id') and immediately names the sibling it is not (tracker_add_external). An agent can distinguish this from tracker_add_external without opening either 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 gives the routing condition: use tracker_add for jobs with a jobs_search job_id, and use tracker_add_external for jobs found elsewhere with a URL but no job_id. This is a concrete when-to-use-this-vs-alternative statement rather than implied guidance.

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