Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DrawOffer MCP Server

DrawOffer MCP Server

by ql-link
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

读取投递记录

get_application
Read-only

Retrieve an application record by ID to view its current stage, status, linked job posting, and resume. Use the ID from list_applications to inspect a specific application.

Instructions

读取一条投递记录的当前阶段、状态、关联岗位与简历。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "application_id": "<application_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
application_idYes投递记录 ID，来自 list_applications

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The read-only framing matches readOnlyHint=true, so nothing is contradicted. The description adds useful information about scope by listing the returned fields, which goes beyond the annotations. However, it says nothing about behavior when the ID is invalid or missing, about permissions, or about how much resume or job detail is included versus just a reference.

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?

It is a single compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and then enumerates the returned data, with no filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, it covers the purpose and the shape of the result, and the annotations cover the safety profile. It could still say what happens when the record is absent, but nothing essential is missing before calling.

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 coverage is 100%, and the single application_id parameter is already documented, with its pattern and provenance. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

It uses the specific verb 读取 with a clearly scoped resource (一条投递记录) and lists the fields exposed (阶段、状态、关联岗位与简历), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It implicitly separates itself from list_applications by saying 一条, but it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not point to any alternative. The only routing help (that the ID comes from list_applications) lives in the schema, not in the description.

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