FoundRole Jobs - AI Job Search & Application Tracker

Official

by foundrole

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Move a tracked job to another stage

tracker_update_status

Destructive

Update the status of a tracked job to reflect your application progress, such as saved, applied, interviewing, offered, or archived.

Instructions

Updates the status of a tracked job.

Input:

tracked_job_id: The tracked job ID — trackedJobs[].id from tracker_list output, distinct from trackable.id and job.id (required)
status: New status: saved, applied, interviewing, offered, archived (required)
sub_status: Sub-status within the main status, valid only for that status (optional): 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

Output: Returns the updated tracked job.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	Yes	New 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
`tracked_job_id`	Yes	The tracked job ID — `trackedJobs[].id` from tracker_list output, distinct from `trackable.id` and `job.id` (required)

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.

First observedv1.1.9Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful behavioral constraint that sub_status is only valid within its parent status, but says nothing about auth requirements, reversibility of a stage change, or side effects such as notifying the employer or altering timestamps.

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?

The Input/Output structure is front-loaded and easy to scan, but the entire Input block duplicates schema descriptions that are already 100% covered, and the long inline sub_status enumeration is repeated twice across description and schema. Roughly half the text does not earn additional value.

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 and rich annotations, the description covers the inputs, the valid value space, and the return shape, which is sufficient for correct invocation. It falls short only on sibling differentiation and on what a status transition actually changes on the tracked job.

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 100%, and the description's Input section reproduces the schema text nearly verbatim, including the full status/sub_status enumerations. It adds no format, defaulting, or interaction semantics beyond what the schema already documents, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource — updating the status of a tracked job — and the title frames it as moving a job between stages. It is clearly a mutation on a tracked job, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling tracker_update, which an agent would plausibly consider for the same goal.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus tracker_update or the other tracker_* siblings, nor any prerequisites (e.g., that the job must already be tracked). The only routing hint is that tracked_job_id comes from tracker_list output, which is identification, not usage guidance.

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