Skip to main content
Glama
profilesearch

GoHireHumans

Official
by profilesearch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin

get_recommended

Read-only

Rank and return service listings for a plain-language task when you lack precise search terms, scoring by rating, reviews, price, and urgency.

Instructions

Rank service listings for a task described in plain language. Read-only; no API key needed. It guesses a category from keywords in the description, searches listings using the description's first few words, and scores matches by rating, number of reviews, price (listings under $100 score slightly higher) and, for 'high' or 'urgent' tasks, delivery within 2 days. If nothing matches, it falls back to the best-rated listings overall, so check that results are relevant. Returns up to limit listings with service IDs for get_service_details and hire_worker. Use this when you have a task but no precise search terms; use search_services for exact keyword and price filters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of recommendations (default 5, max 10)
urgencyNoHow soon the task is needed. 'high' or 'urgent' boosts listings that deliver within 2 days; 'low' and 'medium' don't change the ranking.medium
budget_rangeNoUSD range compared with each listing's fixed price or hourly rate: '$50-200' or 'under $100'. Filtered locally before ranking; custom-priced listings are left out when a range is given, and unrated providers can still match.
task_descriptionYesThe task in plain language (e.g., 'call 20 restaurants to confirm opening hours'). The first few words drive the search, so lead with the core task.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / budget_range / description
      Previous value: -"USD listed service price range: '$50-200' or 'under $100'. Filtered locally before ranking; unrated providers can still match."New value: +"USD range compared with each listing's fixed price or hourly rate: '$50-200' or 'under $100'. Filtered locally before ranking; custom-priced listings are left out when a range is given, and unrated providers can still match."
    • changedInput schema / properties / task_description / description
      Previous value: -"Describe the task you need done. Be specific about requirements, skills needed, and expected deliverables."New value: +"The task in plain language (e.g., 'call 20 restaurants to confirm opening hours'). The first few words drive the search, so lead with the core task."
    • changedInput schema / properties / urgency / description
      Previous value: -"How urgently you need the task completed"New value: +"How soon the task is needed. 'high' or 'urgent' boosts listings that deliver within 2 days; 'low' and 'medium' don't change the ranking."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description goes well beyond by disclosing the ranking signals (rating, review count, price under $100, 2-day delivery for high/urgent), the keyword-guessing and first-words search mechanics, and the fallback to best-rated listings when nothing matches. It even warns to verify relevance. This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure.

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-loads the purpose, then behaviors, then routing in a compact run of sentences with no filler. Slightly dense and repeats a couple of schema facts (urgency boost), keeping it just short of ideal.

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?

No output schema, yet the description covers the return shape (up to `limit` listings) and how results are consumed (service IDs for get_service_details and hire_worker), plus the fallback caveat. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds ranking semantics not in the schema (e.g., sub-$100 listings score slightly higher, urgency boosting applies to high/urgent only) and frames the output count. Most parameter meaning is still schema-borne, so not a 5.

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 ('Rank service listings') plus the input modality ('task described in plain language'). It also implicitly distinguishes itself from search_services by framing the ranking as fuzzy/keyword-based rather than filter-based.

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 names the condition for use ('when you have a task but no precise search terms') and the alternative for the opposite case ('use search_services for exact keyword and price filters'). Routing is unambiguous.

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