Skip to main content
Glama

Contio MeetingOS

by ai.contio

See who is in a meeting. Use this to view the participant list; use manageMeetingParticipants to add, remove, or change roles. Lists participants of a meeting (`{id}`). Paginate with `limit` and `offset` (1–100). Each item's user id is the value passed to v1RemoveMeetingParticipant. Returns 404 for an unknown or inaccessible meeting.

listMeetingParticipants
Read-onlyIdempotent

See who is in a meeting. Use this to view the participant list; use manageMeetingParticipants to add, remove, or change roles.

Lists participants of a meeting ({id}). Paginate with limit and offset (1–100). Each item's user id is the value passed to v1RemoveMeetingParticipant. Returns 404 for an unknown or inaccessible meeting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMeeting ID
limitNoMaximum number of items per page (1-100, default 20)
offsetNoNumber of items to skip (default 0)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNoArray of items for the current page
limitNoMaximum number of items per page
totalNoTotal number of items across all pages
offsetNoNumber of items skipped from the beginning

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds value beyond them. It discloses that the tool returns 404 for unknown/inaccessible meetings, explains pagination with limit and offset, and notes that the user id in each item is the value passed to v1RemoveMeetingParticipant. No contradictions.

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 concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose and usage guidance. The second paragraph adds pagination, error handling, and cross-reference. Every sentence is necessary and informative.

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?

For a read-only list tool with good annotations, complete schema, and an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, pagination, error handling, and cross-reference to a related tool. No gaps are present.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying the pagination range (1-100) for limit, reinforcing the default behavior, and linking the output user id to the remove endpoint. This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Use this to view the participant list; use manageMeetingParticipants to add, remove, or change roles.' It also mentions pagination and how to use the user id from the output to remove participants, giving clear context for when and how to use the tool.

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

All Contio MeetingOS toolsInspect
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