mcp-lever

Read one opening

get_job

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve one Lever job opening by company slug and job ID, including its advert, named sections, and published salary; specify the EU or global instance when needed.

Instructions

Read one Lever opening in full: the advert, its named sections, and the salary as published. company_slug and instance are the ones the row carried, and a site living on both instances holds different openings on each.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`job_id`	Yes	The identifier of one opening, as a search returns it.
`instance`	No	The Lever instance the row came from. Left out, the global one is read.
`company_slug`	Yes	The Lever site name, as resolve_company returns it.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job`	Yes
`notes`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv2.1.0Oct 30, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / country / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / country / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / salary_note / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / job / properties / salary_note / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
First observedv1.0.0Aug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it describes what the read returns and warns that a site present on both instances has different openings on each, which prevents cross-instance mistakes.

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 focused sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the instance distinction is stated compactly afterward.

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 annotations covering safety hints and an output schema covering return shape, the description supplies enough to call this correctly, including the key instance caveat. Minor omissions such as not-found behavior or explicit routing from search_jobs are not critical for a simple read tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines all three parameters. The description still adds semantic nuance by explaining that company_slug and instance should match the originating row and that the same site can have distinct openings per instance, which is not captured in the schema alone.

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 names a specific verb and resource: reading one Lever opening in full. It also enumerates the returned content (advert, named sections, published salary), which distinguishes this from search_jobs and makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

It implies use after obtaining a row from search or resolution by saying company_slug and instance are those the row carried, but it never explicitly names search_jobs or states when not to use this tool. The instance caveat is useful, but alternative-routing guidance remains implicit.

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

Deploy Server