ATS Jobs Gateway: Workday, Greenhouse, Lever & Ashby

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

scrape_ats_jobs

Extract open job postings from Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, and Ashby career sites as normalized JSON, with optional change tracking and job details.

Instructions

Extract open job postings from Workday, Greenhouse, Lever and Ashby career sites.

Args:
    urls: Full career-site URLs; the ATS is detected from the host
        (myworkdayjobs.com, myworkdaysite.com, greenhouse.io, lever.co,
        ashbyhq.com). Bare board names such as "stripe" are rejected. Examples:
        "https://nvidia.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/en-US/NVIDIAExternalCareerSite",
        "https://boards.greenhouse.io/stripe", "https://jobs.lever.co/spotify",
        "https://jobs.ashbyhq.com/ramp".
    only_deltas: Return only jobs that are ADDED, UPDATED or REMOVED since the
        previous run (change tracking is stored in your Apify account).
    max_jobs: Maximum jobs per company, 1-500.
    include_details: Include full job descriptions and salary extraction.

Returns a dict with ``count`` and ``jobs`` (title, url, locations, posted_date,
employment_type, remote_type, compensation_raw, description_html, delta_status,
source_system: workday_cxs | greenhouse | lever | ashby, ...).
Billing: pay-per-event on Apify; see the Actor's Pricing tab.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`urls`	Yes
`max_jobs`	No
`only_deltas`	No
`include_details`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that only_deltas depends on change-tracking state persisted in the user's Apify account, and that billing is pay-per-event. It omits failure modes (anti-bot blocks, invalid host handling), which keeps it from a 5.

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 one-line purpose, then Args and Returns blocks with no filler sentences. It runs slightly long given the URL examples, but every element earns its place against the 0% schema coverage.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no elaboration, and the brief Returns note still helps. Across parameters, statefulness, pricing, and input validation, an agent has everything needed to invoke this correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the Args section documents all four parameters: URL format and validation rules, delta semantics, the 1-500 range for max_jobs, and what include_details adds. This fully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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 ('Extract') plus resource ('open job postings') and names the four supported ATS platforms (Workday, Greenhouse, Lever, Ashby). An agent can determine the scope of the tool from the first sentence alone.

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?

Explains the input contract clearly: full career-site URLs required, ATS inferred from host, and bare board names like 'stripe' explicitly rejected, with four concrete URL examples. It lacks when-not-to-use guidance, but there are no sibling tools to route against, so this is near-complete.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools

scrape_ats_jobsA