List HuntFlow accounts available to your ATS integration. Set raw to true to retrieve complete uncurated data.
Список доступных аккаунтов HuntFlow.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| raw | No | Вернуть полный сырой ответ без курирования |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| count | No | ||
| items | No | ||
| total | No | ||
| total_items | No | ||
| next_page_cursor | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / properties / rawAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Вернуть полный сырой ответ без курирования",
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "items": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "member_type": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "nick": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "next_page_cursor": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "page": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "total": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "total_items": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It only indicates a listing operation but doesn't disclose read-only nature, return format, or any side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately concise, though it could benefit from a more explicit verb structure.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity, the description is minimal. It lacks context about what accounts are, what the output looks like, or any use-case information, making it incomplete for a user unfamiliar with the system.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema description covers the 'raw' parameter fully, and the tool description adds no extra meaning. Since coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states 'List of available HuntFlow accounts', which clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (accounts). It is concise but lacks a verb form; however, the meaning is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like list_vacancies or list_coworkers. There is no mention of scenarios or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.