Which integrations are available for this server?

Enables searching job openings from Greenhouse ATS, including filtering by company, seniority, location, and other criteria.

How do I use job-scout-mcp?

1. Click on "Deploy Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@job-scout-mcp Search for senior software engineer jobs in New York" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

job-scout-mcp

by pabnatanawan87

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

job-scout-mcp

A Model Context Protocol server that scouts job openings from public, ToS-clean sources and hands them to any MCP client (Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, etc.) as structured tools.

It runs with zero API keys out of the box, and lights up extra sources when you add free credentials. No scraping, no logins, no terms-of-service gray area — every source is either an official API or a public job-board endpoint meant to be read programmatically.

Demo

Ask your MCP client for leadership roles, and the server queries the right boards and returns ranked, filtered results:

Example: searching for director-level engineering roles

Illustrative example rendered from real server output against public Greenhouse boards — swap in a real Claude Desktop screenshot (see the comment in this file's source).

Related MCP server: trackly-cli

Why this design

Most "job scraper" projects break the moment a site changes its HTML, get IP-banned, or quietly violate a platform's terms. This server takes the opposite approach:

Applicant Tracking System boards (Greenhouse, Lever, Ashby) expose public JSON feeds per company — this is where real senior/leadership roles are posted first.
Hacker News "Who is Hiring" is read through the free Algolia HN API.
RemoteOK publishes a free JSON feed (with attribution).
Adzuna and USAJobs are official APIs with free developer keys.

The result is stable, legal, and genuinely useful — especially for scouting senior, manager, director, and executive roles.

Sources

Source	Auth	What it covers
Greenhouse	none	All public roles at any company on Greenhouse
Lever	none	All public roles at any company on Lever
Ashby	none	All public roles at any company on Ashby
Hacker News	none	Latest monthly "Who is Hiring" thread
RemoteOK	none	Remote-friendly roles (attribution required)
Adzuna	free key	Broad aggregated search + salary histograms
USAJobs	free key	US federal government roles

Tools

Tool	Description
`search_jobs`	Search all enabled sources with free-text, location, seniority, remote-only, and date filters.
`list_company_jobs`	List every open role at one company via its ATS (`greenhouse`/`lever`/`ashby` + slug).
`salary_context`	Salary distribution for a role/region (requires Adzuna).
`list_sources`	Show which sources are enabled and why any are disabled.

minSeniority accepts any, mid, senior, lead, manager, director, vp, exec — seniority is inferred from the job title, so you can filter a company's whole board down to just leadership roles.

Install

git clone https://github.com/pabnatanawan87/job-scout-mcp.git
cd job-scout-mcp
npm install
npm run build

Configure (optional)

Everything works keyless. To enable extra sources or set default tracked companies, copy .env.example to .env and fill in what you want:

cp .env.example .env

Find a company's ATS slug from its careers URL and add it to TRACKED_COMPANIES as provider:slug (e.g. greenhouse:stripe,lever:netflix,ashby:notion). Tracked companies are searched automatically by search_jobs.

Use with Claude Desktop

Add this to your claude_desktop_config.json (%APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json on Windows, ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json on macOS):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "job-scout": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["C:/absolute/path/to/job-scout-mcp/dist/index.js"],
      "env": {
        "TRACKED_COMPANIES": "greenhouse:stripe,lever:netflix,ashby:notion"
      }
    }
  }
}

Restart Claude Desktop, then ask things like:

"Find director-level engineering roles at the companies I track, posted this month."
"List all open manager roles at Stripe."
"What's the salary range for an engineering director in London?"

Use with Claude Code

claude mcp add job-scout -- node C:/absolute/path/to/job-scout-mcp/dist/index.js

Develop

npm run watch     # recompile on change
npm run inspect   # launch the MCP Inspector against the server

How it's built

src/
├── index.ts          # MCP server + tool registration (stdio transport)
├── types.ts          # Normalized Job model + Source contract
├── config.ts         # Environment-driven configuration
├── http.ts           # fetch + TTL cache + polite User-Agent
├── filter.ts         # Seniority inference, text/location/date filters, ranking
├── format.ts         # Markdown rendering of results
└── sources/          # One module per source, all implementing `Source`
    ├── greenhouse.ts  lever.ts  ashby.ts
    ├── hnhiring.ts    remoteok.ts
    └── adzuna.ts      usajobs.ts

Adding a source is one file: implement the Source interface (name, isEnabled, search) and register it in sources/index.ts. Each source maps its raw response into the shared Job shape, so filtering, ranking, and rendering are identical across all of them.

License

MIT — see LICENSE.

Available Tools

4 tools

list_company_jobsList a company's open rolesA

Fetch all public postings from a single company's ATS job board. Provider is one of greenhouse, lever, or ashby; slug is the company identifier from its careers URL (e.g. boards.greenhouse.io/).

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	Company identifier in the ATS URL.
`query`	No	Optional free-text filter.
`provider`	Yes
`minSeniority`	No	Only return roles at or above this seniority level.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'public postings' suggesting a safe read operation, but does not address pagination, authentication, rate limits, or response format beyond the implied list. This is insufficient for agents to anticipate side effects or limitations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences efficiently state the core function and key parameter guidance. No redundancy, with the most important information front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the main purpose and key parameters, but lacking an output schema, it does not specify the return format or pagination behavior. Optional parameters like query and minSeniority are only in the schema, and the description omits any mention of them, relying on the schema for their semantics.

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 description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining 'provider' enum values and providing a concrete slug format example. It also clarifies that these are the two required parameters. Schema coverage is 75%, and the description fills the gap for the undocumented provider parameter.

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?

The description clearly states 'Fetch all public postings from a single company's ATS job board,' specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling search_jobs by emphasizing 'single company' and listing supported providers.

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?

The description provides clear context that this tool targets one company's ATS job board, implying when to use it (known company). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as for cross-company searches, which search_jobs likely handles.

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

list_sourcesList job sourcesA

Show every source, whether it is currently enabled, and why any are disabled. Useful for diagnosing configuration.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a read-only listing of sources with status details, which is adequately transparent. It does not mention potential permissions or data sensitivity, but for a simple list tool this is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Show every source...') and immediately adds value with status and diagnostic context. No wasted words.

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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description fully conveys what is returned (sources, enabled status, disabled reasons) and when to use it. It is complete and self-contained.

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 input schema is empty (0 parameters). Per the rubric, the baseline is 4 when there are no parameters, and the description need not add parameter details. It correctly focuses on the output behavior instead.

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?

The description clearly states the tool shows all job sources, their enabled status, and reasons for being disabled. This is a specific verb+resource combination that unambiguously distinguishes it from siblings like search_jobs or list_company_jobs.

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?

It provides a clear context for when to use the tool (diagnosing configuration) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. Still, the context is sufficient to guide appropriate use.

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

salary_contextSalary distribution for a roleA

Return the salary distribution (histogram) for a role and optional location, powered by Adzuna. Requires ADZUNA_APP_ID/ADZUNA_APP_KEY.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`role`	Yes	Role title, e.g. 'engineering director'.
`location`	No	Optional location term.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the tool is powered by Adzuna and requires API keys, which is useful. However, it does not describe the output format, potential errors, or any rate limits. It adds some behavioral context but not comprehensive transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and includes the auth requirement. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, optional inputs, and auth requirements. It leaves some ambiguity about the exact distribution format, but it is mostly complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (role and location), so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool returns a salary distribution (histogram) for a role and optional location. It uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('salary distribution'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_jobs or list_company_jobs.

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 description implies usage when salary data is needed for a role/location, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. Context is implied but not fully developed.

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

search_jobsSearch jobsA

Search job openings across all enabled sources (Greenhouse/Lever/Ashby tracked companies, Hacker News 'Who is hiring', RemoteOK, and optionally Adzuna/USAJobs). Supports free-text, location, seniority, remote-only, and date filters. Ideal for scouting senior/leadership roles.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results (default 25).
`query`	No	Free-text terms matched against title/description.
`sources`	No	Restrict to specific source names (see list_sources).
`location`	No	Location term, matched loosely.
`remoteOnly`	No	Restrict to remote-friendly roles.
`postedAfter`	No	ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD); only roles posted on/after this date.
`minSeniority`	No	Only return roles at or above this seniority level.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions optional sources (Adzuna/USAJobs) and filter capabilities, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, rate limits, pagination, or how results are aggregated. The 'Search' verb implies a non-destructive operation, but without explicit disclosure it remains somewhat vague.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three concise sentences with no filler. The first lists sources, the second outlines filter capabilities, and the third states the primary use case. Every sentence carries useful information.

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?

The description covers sources, filters, and target use case. Since there is no output schema, it could have mentioned the return format or pagination, and it lacks a pointer to list_sources for source discovery. However, for a search tool with seven optional parameters, it provides sufficient orientation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description summarizes filter types (free-text, location, seniority, remote-only, date) and hints at minSeniority usage ('Ideal for scouting senior/leadership roles'), but adds no new semantic details beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool searches job openings, explicitly enumerating the sources covered and mentioning it is ideal for senior/leadership roles. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_company_jobs (specific companies) and list_sources (source enumeration).

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?

The description gives clear context: use when you want to search across multiple enabled sources, with an emphasis on senior roles. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as pointing to list_company_jobs for company-specific searches.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

4 tool updatesv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026
- First observedlist_company_jobs
- First observedlist_sources
- First observedsalary_context
- First observedsearch_jobs

Deploy Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A4/5.0

Scored 2026-08-02 17:30 across 4 tools

Disambiguation4/5

The tools are largely distinct: search_jobs does broad searches, list_company_jobs targets a specific ATS board, salary_context provides salary data, and list_sources handles configuration. However, search_jobs may already cover jobs from tracked companies, creating minor overlap with list_company_jobs.

Naming Consistency4/5

Three tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (search_jobs, list_company_jobs, list_sources), but salary_context breaks the pattern by using a noun phrase instead of an action verb. This is a minor inconsistency across the set.

Tool Count4/5

With four tools, the count is slightly lean but appropriate for the focused job-scouting purpose. Each tool contributes a distinct capability, though the set could benefit from one or two additional tools for fuller coverage.

Completeness4/5

The core workflows of searching jobs, listing a company's jobs, and accessing salary context are covered. Missing capabilities include fetching full details for a single job posting and managing enabled sources, but these are minor gaps in the current scope.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

GitHub Repository

Need Help?

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

nü people Job Server A
io.github.nu-people
Public MCP server for discovering open jobs. Search, filter, and get application links.
Search
52
Corvi Careers B
io.github.jobswithgpt
Search remote and onsite jobs through the public Corvi Careers MCP server.
Search
2
getjobzi-mcp
io.github.getjobzi
GetJobzi MCP server for job search, application tracking, and career forecasting.
Search AI & Machine Learning
2
Startup Jobs A
io.github.killbridge
Search live startup jobs from Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT via MCP. Free, no account needed.
Search
81

Related MCP Servers

job-search-mcp
Search Web Scraping
VincenzoImp
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
MCP server that exposes job search data from multiple boards, enabling clients to query and manage job listings via natural language.
Updated 11 days ago (2026-09-01 23:00 UTC)
7
MIT
trackly-cliofficial
Search CRM Project Management
trackly-app
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
MCP server for job search and application tracking, enabling AI agents to search jobs, get details, manage applications, and find contacts across 128K+ jobs and 1,900+ companies.
Updated 6 hours ago (2026-09-12 19:36 UTC)
638
3
MIT
RecruitData
Search Research & Data
ssaikrishna862
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Unified job search MCP server that aggregates live listings from multiple job boards with deduplication, enabling AI agents to find and filter jobs by keyword and location.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-11 20:57 UTC)
MIT
job-search-mcp
Search Email Autonomous Agents
OmriH-Elister
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
An MCP server that exposes job-search and application-management capabilities to compatible AI clients, enabling discovery of vacancies, drafting of tailored application materials, and coordinated human-approved submissions.
Updated 19 days ago (2026-08-24 16:24 UTC)
MIT

job-scout-mcp

Demo

Why this design

Sources

Tools

Install

Configure (optional)

Use with Claude Desktop

Use with Claude Code

Develop

How it's built

License

Available Tools

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

trackly-cliofficial