Contio MeetingOS

Read the details of one unscheduled backlog item. Use this when the user asks about a specific backlog item; use listBacklogItems to see all active backlog and listBacklogItemHistory for used or discarded ones. Fetches one active backlog item by `{id}`; this is the backlog handle, not `agenda_item_id`. Items that are already assigned or deleted return 404; find them in v1ListBacklogItemHistory. `talking_points` contains only the caller's private note.

getBacklogItem

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the details of one unscheduled backlog item. Use this when the user asks about a specific backlog item; use listBacklogItems to see all active backlog and listBacklogItemHistory for used or discarded ones.

Fetches one active backlog item by {id}; this is the backlog handle, not agenda_item_id. Items that are already assigned or deleted return 404; find them in v1ListBacklogItemHistory. talking_points contains only the caller's private note.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Backlog item ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Unique identifier of the backlog item (the deferral ID)
`title`	No
`item_type`	No
`deleted_at`	No	Time the item was removed from the backlog, present only on history entries
`presenters`	No	Presenters for this backlog item, enriched with name and email when the user record is available.
`assigned_at`	No	Time the item was assigned to a meeting, present only on history entries
`deferred_at`	No
`description`	No	Detailed description of the backlog item, in Markdown. Empty when the item has no description.
`origin_type`	No	How the item reached the backlog: MANUAL for items created directly on the backlog, MEETING or SMS for deferred items
`agenda_item_id`	No	ID of the agenda item holding this backlog item's content
`talking_points`	No	Private talking points for the authenticated user on this backlog item, in Markdown. Only returned when the user has talking points.
`deferrer_user_id`	No	ID of the user who placed the item on the backlog
`origin_meeting_id`	No	ID of the meeting the item was deferred from, absent for items created directly on the backlog
`origin_meeting_title`	No	Title of the meeting the item was deferred from, when still available
`destination_meeting_id`	No	Meeting the item was assigned to, present only on history entries
`time_allocation_minutes`	No
`destination_agenda_item_id`	No	Agenda item created by the assignment, present only on history entries

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the id parameter is specifically the 'backlog handle, not agenda_item_id', items assigned or deleted return 404, and 'talking_points contains only the caller's private note'. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two concise paragraphs. The first sentence declares purpose and usage. The second paragraph provides key behavioral detail in a compact format. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the simple tool (1 parameter, no enums, annotations present, output schema present), the description fully covers the edge cases (404 for assigned/deleted items, pointer to history, private nature of talking_points). The output schema exists so the agent can infer return structure. No gaps remain for this complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% with a single required 'id' parameter described as 'Backlog item ID'. The description adds significant semantic value beyond the schema: it clarifies that the id is the 'backlog handle, not agenda_item_id' and that items not in active unscheduled status return 404. This helps the agent avoid passing the wrong identifier.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use: 'when the user asks about a specific backlog item', and when not to use: 'items that are already assigned or deleted return 404; find them in v1ListBacklogItemHistory'. It also names exact alternatives: 'use listBacklogItems to see all active backlog and listBacklogItemHistory for used or discarded ones'. This provides full usage guidance.

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

All Contio MeetingOS tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct, with clear separation between meetings, agenda/backlog items, action items, participants, and calendar events. However, `manageMeetingContent` bundles both raw file attachments and AI context documents into one tool, which could cause confusion for an agent deciding which contentType variant to use.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., `listMeetings`, `getMeeting`, `deleteUserToken`), but there are minor deviations like `manageMeetingItems` (verb_noun) vs `manageActionItems` (verb_noun) and `getMeetingTranscript` which is consistent, but `getMe` breaks the pattern as a short form. Overall, predictable and well-organized.

Tool Count4/5

With 30 tools, the count is on the higher side but reasonable given the broad domain covering meetings, agenda, backlogs, action items, participants, calendar events, user tokens, and content management. Each tool serves a specific purpose, though a slight reduction by combining some closely related functions could improve focus.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core lifecycle for meetings, agenda/backlog items, action items, participants, and content management. Minor gaps exist, such as the lack of tools for managing meeting templates (only listed, not created/deleted) and no tool for sending invitations via email, but these are not critical for the main use cases.

Resources

Need Help?