Huntflow MCP Server

add_applicant_comment

Add a comment to a candidate's activity feed, either as a vacancy-specific note or a personal note about the applicant.

Instructions

Добавить комментарий в ленту кандидата (по вакансии или личную заметку).

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": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "applicant_id": "<applicant_id>",
      "comment": "<comment>"
    },
    "name": "add_applicant_comment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`comment`	Yes	Текст комментария
`account_id`	Yes	ID аккаунта HuntFlow
`vacancy_id`	No	ID вакансии; без него комментарий будет личной заметкой по кандидату
`applicant_id`	Yes	ID кандидата

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false and destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the comment lands in the applicant's feed and that mode depends on vacancy presence, but says nothing about visibility of personal notes, permissions, or whether duplicates are possible — modest added value over the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with the verb front-loaded and the mode distinction attached as a parenthetical — no filler. It is efficient but deliberately minimal, leaving useful context unsaid.

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 simple write tool with full schema coverage and annotations present, the description covers what the tool does and both modes of operation. Missing only ancillary details like visibility of notes and permission requirements, which are secondary here.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema itself already explains that omitting vacancy_id yields a personal note. The description restates that behavior at a high level but adds no new syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Добавить комментарий в ленту кандидата') and clarifies the two posting modes (vacancy-linked comment vs. personal note). No sibling tool deals with comments, so there is no ambiguity to resolve, but the purpose is immediately legible.

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?

The parenthetical implies the two usage modes, and an agent can infer that omitting vacancy_id produces a personal note. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of prerequisites such as needing the applicant to exist or having write access.

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