get_meeting_recapGet one personalized Referna meeting recap by ID from the list. Returns not found when the key owner cannot access it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sessionId | Yes | Recap ID returned as sessionId by list_meeting_recaps. Mixer IDs have mixer:<mixerId>:<occurrenceId> format. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| recap | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "recap": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "agendaCoverage": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "covered": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "note": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "topicKey": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "topicTitle": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "topicKey",
+ "topicTitle",
+ "covered",
+ "note"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "bodyText": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "conversations": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "agendaCoverage": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "covered": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "note": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "topicKey": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "topicTitle": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "topicKey",
+ "topicTitle",
+ "covered",
+ "note"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "partnerEmail": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "round": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "round",
+ "partnerEmail",
+ "agendaCoverage"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "counterpartEmail": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "kind": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "meetingDate": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "sessionId": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "subject": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "summaryCreatedAt": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "sessionId",
+ "kind",
+ "title",
+ "counterpartEmail",
+ "meetingDate",
+ "summaryCreatedAt",
+ "subject",
+ "bodyText",
+ "agendaCoverage",
+ "conversations"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "recap"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / properties / sessionId / descriptionPrevious value: -"Session ID returned by list_meeting_recaps."New value: +"Recap ID returned as sessionId by list_meeting_recaps. Mixer IDs have mixer:<mixerId>:<occurrenceId> format."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by disclosing that access failures return not found when the key owner cannot access the recap, which helps an agent interpret error responses.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed immediately by the relevant access-failure behavior.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only retrieval tool with one fully documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and access behavior. No critical calling information is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema itself explains that sessionId is the recap ID returned by list_meeting_recaps and may use mixer:<mixerId>:<occurrenceId> format. The description only adds 'by ID from the list,' so the schema does most of the semantic work.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific verb and resource: retrieve one personalized Referna meeting recap by ID. It explicitly scopes the operation to a single recap from the list, distinguishing it from the sibling list_meeting_recaps tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'from the list' implies the recap ID comes from list_meeting_recaps, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly name the sibling tool as the discovery path or state when not to use this tool, leaving the guidance implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.