Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DrawOffer MCP Server

DrawOffer MCP Server

by ql-link
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

读取简历

get_resume
Read-only

Read a resume’s Markdown body by ID from list_resumes to tailor job applications, prepare interviews, or draft cover letters.

Instructions

读取一份简历的正文（Markdown）。适合用来按岗位改简历、准备面试或写求职信。

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": {
      "resume_id": "<resume_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_resume"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resume_idYes简历 ID，来自 list_resumes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds the useful detail that the payload is Markdown text, but says nothing about behavior on an invalid/nonexistent resume_id or about size limits.

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 short sentences, format and purpose front-loaded, with zero filler. Everything present earns its place.

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 single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers purpose and return format adequately. Only error/edge behavior for a bad ID is left unaddressed, a minor gap.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100% — the schema already documents resume_id, its numeric pattern, and its origin from list_resumes. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('读取一份简历的正文') and specifies the return format (Markdown), which cleanly separates it from list_resumes/list_jobs. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is not, but the singular-resume scope makes the distinction obvious.

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?

Gives three concrete usage contexts (tailoring a resume per job, interview prep, cover letter), which is clear when-to-use guidance. It stops short of stating exclusions or naming list_resumes as the prerequisite lookup step, so it is not a 5.

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