Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Huntflow MCP Server

Huntflow MCP Server

by urfan03
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

add_applicant_to_vacancy

Attaches an applicant to a vacancy at a specified hiring stage, with optional comment, quota, employment date, or rejection reason, to move candidates into the correct recruiting pipeline step.

Instructions

Прикрепить кандидата к вакансии на указанный этап подбора.

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>",
      "vacancy_id": "<vacancy_id>",
      "status_id": "<status_id>"
    },
    "name": "add_applicant_to_vacancy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commentNoКомментарий
status_idYesID этапа подбора (см. list_stages)
account_idYesID аккаунта HuntFlow
vacancy_idYesID вакансии
applicant_idYesID кандидата
fill_quota_idNoID квоты — для этапа «принят»
employment_dateNoДата выхода на работу — для этапа «принят»
rejection_reason_idNoID причины отказа (см. list_rejection_reasons) — для этапа «отказ»

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing further: it does not say what happens on duplicate attachment, whether the call fails or is a no-op, or which stage-specific fields become mandatory — meaningful gaps for a non-idempotent write.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Its brevity is efficient rather than padded, though it errs toward under-specification rather than over-explanation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an eight-parameter mutation with four required IDs, stage-conditional fields and no output schema, the description is thin: it does not explain the conditional parameter relevance per stage or describe the result of the operation. The schema carries nearly all the weight, leaving the agent to derive the multi-stage semantics itself.

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%, so all eight parameters — including the conditional fill_quota_id, employment_date and rejection_reason_id — are already documented in the schema. The description only alludes to status_id via 'на указанный этап подбора' and adds no syntax, format or dependency detail beyond that.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource pair ('Прикрепить кандидата к вакансии') plus the qualifying detail 'на указанный этап подбора', so the action is unambiguous. It stops short of distinguishing this from the sibling change_applicant_status, which plausibly also moves a candidate through stages.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as change_applicant_status or set_vacancy_state, and no prerequisites or preconditions (e.g. candidate must exist, vacancy must be open). The agent must infer the usage scenario entirely from the name.

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