poslovi-mcp
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@poslovi-mcpPotraži mi poslove za Python developera"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
poslovi-mcp
MCP server + CLI for searching Serbian job boards — poslovi.infostud.com and helloworld.rs — from Claude (or any MCP client) or straight from your terminal.
No API keys, no accounts: it reads the public listing pages and the schema.org
JobPosting JSON-LD that both boards embed on every posting.
$ poslovi search "ai engineer"
1. AI Automation & Lead Operations Specialist Thrive Talent Solutions [infostud]
https://poslovi.infostud.com/posao/ai-automation-lead-operations-specialist/...
2. Senior Data Engineer (Technical Leadership) Keba d.o.o. [helloworld]
https://www.helloworld.rs/posao/Senior-Data-Engineer-Technical-Leadership-Track/...Install
python3 -m venv .venv && source .venv/bin/activate
pip install -e . # or: pip install -e ".[dev]" for testsRelated MCP server: MCP Job Toolkit
CLI
poslovi search "python developer" # both boards
poslovi search "ml engineer" --board infostud # one board
poslovi search "devops" --page 2 # pagination
poslovi show <posting-url> # full posting text + deadlineMCP server
The same functionality as two MCP tools, search_jobs and get_job,
served over stdio:
# Claude Code
claude mcp add poslovi -- /path/to/poslovi-mcp/.venv/bin/poslovi-mcpor in any MCP client config:
{
"mcpServers": {
"poslovi": {
"command": "/path/to/poslovi-mcp/.venv/bin/poslovi-mcp"
}
}
}Then just ask: "nađi mi AI poslove u Beogradu i izdvoji one sa LLM iskustvom" — the model searches, opens the interesting ones, and reasons over the full posting text.
How it works
boards.py— one parser for both boards (they share a platform): listing pages are matched by the/posao/{slug}/{company}/{id}URL pattern, detail pages by theirJobPostingJSON-LD block, with page text as fallback.server.py— FastMCP server exposingsearch_jobs/get_job.cli.py— standalone CLI, no MCP client needed.tests/— offline parser tests against recorded HTML fixtures.
Tests
pytestAvailable Tools
2 toolsget_jobA
Fetch one job posting and return its full details.
Args: url: Posting URL returned by search_jobs.
Returns: JSON object with title, company, location, dates, employment type, qualifications, and the posting text.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, but the description indicates a read-only fetch operation and lists the return fields. This adequately communicates the tool's behavior for a simple retrieval endpoint.
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 concise and well-organized with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, and no repetition exists.
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?
The tool is simple with one parameter. The description explains the parameter, output structure, and relationship to the sibling. Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), this is complete.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning: 'Posting URL returned by search_jobs', which clarifies the parameter's origin and expected format beyond the schema's type-only definition.
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 explicitly states 'Fetch one job posting and return its full details', using a specific verb and resource. The sibling tool 'search_jobs' implies a listing function, so this tool is clearly distinct.
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?
The description notes that the URL comes from 'search_jobs', establishing a clear sequence. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives beyond the sibling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_jobsA
Search job postings on Serbian job boards.
Args: query: Search terms, e.g. "python developer" or "AI engineer". board: "infostud", "helloworld", or "all" (default) for both. page: Results page, starting at 1.
Returns: JSON list of postings with title, company, url, board, and id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| board | No | all | |
| query | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes return format as JSON list with fields but does not disclose auth, rate limits, or side effects. No annotations to rely on.
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?
Concise docstring with Args and Returns sections, no wasted words, purpose stated upfront.
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?
Covers parameters and return structure sufficiently for a search tool; could specify pagination limits but adequate.
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?
Input schema has 0% description coverage; the description adds examples for query, board choices, and page default, compensating well.
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 clearly states 'Search job postings on Serbian job boards.' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling 'get_job'.
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?
Provides guidance on query, board options, and page. Does not explicitly contrast with 'get_job', but context implies search vs single retrieval.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v0.1.0- First observed
get_job - First observed
search_jobs
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_jobs lists job postings matching a query, while get_job retrieves full details for a specific posting. No overlap or ambiguity exists.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (search_jobs, get_job), making the naming predictable and easy to understand.
With only 2 tools, the set is minimal but appropriate for a focused read-only job board API. It slightly undershoots the typical 3-15 range but still feels well-scoped.
The tools cover the core read operations (search and detail retrieval) for job postings. Missing features like filtering by location or job type are minor gaps that don't severely impact usability.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Search live startup jobs from Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT via MCP. Free, no account needed.
AI job search MCP — fact-checked jobs, application tracker, alerts. ChatGPT, Claude, Cursor.
Search remote and onsite jobs through the public Corvi Careers MCP server.
- Cavuno MCPOAuthcom.cavuno
Connect Claude, Cursor, Codex, and other MCP clients to manage your Cavuno job board.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceTurn any careers page into a structured job feed. Straight from Claude, Cursor or any MCP client.229 npm1MIT
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables searching for jobs across Australian platforms (Seek and LinkedIn) from Claude or any MCP-compatible client, with filters for location, salary, employment type, and more.14-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables job search and scraping across multiple job boards (LinkedIn, Indeed, Glassdoor, etc.) with advanced filtering, directly from Claude Desktop or other MCP clients.6MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables Claude Desktop to scan, analyze, and track job postings from Hacker News and Y Combinator's Work at a Startup using a 24-tool MCP server with multi-stage filtering and resume-based ranking.-