Huntflow MCP Server

list_vacancies

Read-only

Lists Huntflow vacancies, defaulting to open roles, with filters for account, ownership, status, and pagination to support recruiting data access.

Instructions

Список вакансий в HuntFlow (по умолчанию открытые).

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>"
    },
    "name": "list_vacancies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Вернуть полный сырой ответ без курирования
`mine`	No	Только вакансии, где я участник
`page`	No	Номер страницы (с 1)
`count`	No	Кол-во на странице (макс 100)
`state`	No	Фильтр по состоянию (альтернатива opened)
`opened`	No	Только открытые вакансии
`account_id`	Yes	ID аккаунта HuntFlow

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`count`	No
`items`	No
`total`	No
`total_items`	No
`next_page_cursor`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description carries a lighter burden. The parenthetical about open-by-default is useful framing but simply restates the schema's opened=true default, and nothing is said about pagination limits, the raw flag's effect, or how state interacts with opened. With annotations covering safety and an output schema present, a 3 is appropriate.

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 zero waste and the key default surfaced inline. It is well-formed for its length, though the extreme brevity leaves obvious gaps that other dimensions penalize.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is a read-only list with a fully described 7-parameter schema and an output schema, so much of the burden is off the description. Still, overlapping filters (opened vs state) and the raw curating flag are left unexplained in prose, which for a 7-parameter tool leaves the definition only minimally viable.

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 every parameter including the state enum and the count maximum is already documented. The description's only parameter-adjacent content is the open-by-default note, which duplicates the schema default; baseline applies rather than added value.

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 ("Список вакансий в HuntFlow") plus the default scope ("по умолчанию открытые"), which lets an agent tell it apart from get_vacancy or create_vacancy by name alone. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling it is not, so it does not reach a 5.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance beyond the parenthetical default, and no exclusions or alternatives (e.g., when to call get_vacancy instead, or how this differs from list_vacancy_applicants). Usage is only inferable from the verb.

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