Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-lightcast

mcp-lightcast

by lawwu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Get Postings Metadata

get_postings_metadata
Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover available US job posting fields, filters, metrics, and months to identify which Lightcast data dimensions and time ranges you can query.

Instructions

Discover accessible US posting fields, filters, metrics, and available months.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_postings_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds that results are US-scoped and cover accessible fields, filters, metrics, and months, but does not explain access restrictions or the shape of the metadata beyond the output schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, listing the four kinds of metadata returned. It is efficient, though "accessible" is slightly vague about what access model applies.

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 no parameters and an output schema present, the description only needs to convey scope and contents, which it does. The main gap is not relating this metadata tool to the many sibling metadata tools an agent must choose between.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to compensate for. Baseline of 4 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?

States a specific verb and resource set: discovering accessible US posting fields, filters, metrics, and available months. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not differentiate itself from the many sibling metadata tools such as get_benchmark_metadata or get_classification_metadata.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The word "Discover" implies this is a schema/introspection step to run before querying postings, which gives implied usage context. However, it never explicitly says when to use this tool versus sibling metadata tools or when it is unnecessary.

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