Contio MeetingOS

Read metadata for one AI context document on a meeting. Use this when the user asks about a specific context doc; for raw files use v1GetMeetingAttachment, and to read the actual text use manageMeetingContent download. Fetches metadata for the AI context document identified by meeting `{id}` and `{context_id}`. For raw file attachments use v1GetMeetingAttachment. To retrieve the actual bytes use v1DownloadMeetingContextContent. Unknown or inaccessible ids return 404.

getMeetingContext

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read metadata for one AI context document on a meeting. Use this when the user asks about a specific context doc; for raw files use v1GetMeetingAttachment, and to read the actual text use manageMeetingContent download.

Fetches metadata for the AI context document identified by meeting {id} and {context_id}. For raw file attachments use v1GetMeetingAttachment. To retrieve the actual bytes use v1DownloadMeetingContextContent. Unknown or inaccessible ids return 404.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Meeting ID
`context_id`	Yes	Context ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No
`title`	No
`model_id`	No
`source_id`	No	SourceID identifies the uploading source; omitted for first-party user uploads.
`created_at`	No
`meeting_id`	No
`updated_at`	No
`file_status`	No
`source_name`	No	SourceName is the display name of the uploading source, when resolvable.
`context_type`	No
`workspace_id`	No
`platform_name`	No
`source_format`	No
`created_by_user_id`	No

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the agent knows this is a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds value by noting that unknown or inaccessible IDs return 404, but doesn't elaborate beyond that (e.g., response format, pagination). With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 succinct paragraphs with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and alternatives, then adds behavioral notes. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has only 2 parameters with 100% schema coverage, rich annotations, an output schema, and no nested objects, the description is complete. It covers purpose, when not to use, alternatives, and error behavior. No gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100%, meaning the input schema already documents both parameters (id and context_id) with descriptions. The description restates that the tool uses meeting `{id}` and `{context_id}`, but adds no additional details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format, constraints, or examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tells when to use this tool (when user asks about a specific context doc) and when not to (for raw files use v1GetMeetingAttachment; for text use manageMeetingContent download). It also mentions behavior for unknown or inaccessible IDs (return 404), providing clear 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?