Skip to main content
Glama

Agentic Endpoints

by com.oliverkiss

Import a meeting transcript

meetings_import

Store a transcript so it can be searched later. visibility is a required decision and cannot be guessed for you: 'queryable' stores plaintext, indexes it, and means this service can read it; 'private' stores ciphertext you encrypted yourself, which is unreadable here and therefore NEVER searchable. Send transcript for queryable and ciphertext for private -- the mismatched combinations are refused rather than silently doing the wrong thing. The first import into a namespace returns a namespace_token shown exactly once; save it or the namespace is unrecoverable. Costs $0.004 in USDC on Base, paid via the x402 protocol.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoHuman-readable meeting title
sourceNoFree-form label for where the transcript came from, e.g. webvtt, srt, plain-text
namespaceYesIsolation scope, e.g. my-meetings-<uuid>
ciphertextNoClient-side encrypted transcript. Only valid with visibility 'private'.
transcriptNoPlaintext transcript. Only valid with visibility 'queryable'.
visibilityNo'queryable' (plaintext, searchable, readable by this service) or 'private' (ciphertext, never searchable). Defaults to private.
occurred_atNoISO-8601 time the meeting happened
participantsNoOptional attendees
namespace_tokenNoOne-time token issued by the first call that claimed this namespace. Required for every later call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoPresent alongside a newly issued namespace_token
statusYes'imported' on success
meeting_idYesIdentifier for later meetings_get calls
searchableNoFalse for private meetings, which are never searchable
size_bytesNoStored size
visibilityNo'queryable' or 'private'
namespace_tokenNoIssued only on the first import into a namespace, shown exactly once

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations offering no hints beyond non-read-only, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: it explains the privacy/searchability tradeoff, the required ciphertext/transcript pairing, the one-time namespace token, and the $0.004 cost paid via x402. 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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, the central privacy decision, validation behavior, token recovery risk, and cost. It is front-loaded with the core action and then delivers high-value operational constraints without fluff.

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 tool with 9 parameters and subtle privacy semantics, the description covers the tricky decision points, the refusal behavior, the one-time token consequence, and the payment requirement. The output schema is noted as present, so the description need not enumerate return fields; nothing essential appears missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical meaning beyond it: that visibility is a decision that cannot be guessed, that transcript only pairs with queryable and ciphertext only with private, and that mismatched combinations are refused. It also explains the namespace_token lifecycle, which is essential for correct multi-call usage.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Store a transcript so it can be searched later.' It clearly distinguishes this from the sibling search/list/get tools by emphasizing that this is the ingestion path, and the visibility modes further define the resource's behavior.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear context for when to use the tool: to store a transcript for later search. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'instead of meetings_search' but the import vs. search distinction is strongly implied by the wording and sibling list.

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

All Agentic Endpoints 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource and action: meetings have import/list/search/get, the once-key system has claim/complete/release, vault has store/retrieve/exists/list/delete/rotate_token, and compress/pdf_parse/scrape are separate utilities. No two tools appear to perform the same side effect, so an agent should not struggle to choose among them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tools use consistent snake_case and mostly follow a domain_verb pattern (meetings_*, once_key_*, vault_*), with standalone verbs like compress, scrape, and pdf_parse for single utilities. The naming is predictable and easy to extend.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools the server is just above the ideal 3-15 range, but the count is justified by six distinct capability clusters. Each tool earns its place, and nothing feels redundant.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycles are covered well: vault has full CRUD plus token rotation, once-key has claim/complete/release, and meetings provide import/search/get/list. Minor gaps include no meeting update/delete and no direct namespace management, but these are workable rather than blocking.

Resources