Google Calendar and Meet MCP Server

meet_v2_get_transcript

Retrieve specific Google Meet transcript details for meeting documentation, analysis, or compliance purposes using the Meet API v2.

Instructions

[Meet API v2 GA] Get details of a specific transcript

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "transcript_name": "<transcript_name>"
    },
    "name": "meet_v2_get_transcript"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`transcript_name`	Yes	Name of the transcript (conferenceRecords/{record_id}/transcripts/{transcript_id})

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jan 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'Get details' but doesn't clarify what details are returned, if it's a read-only operation, potential errors, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic purpose.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could be slightly more informative to improve completeness without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a transcript retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'details' include, how the transcript is formatted, or any behavioral aspects like error handling. This leaves the agent with incomplete context for effective use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'transcript_name' fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any extra meaning about parameters beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Get details') and resource ('a specific transcript'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'meet_v2_list_transcripts' or 'meet_v2_list_transcript_entries', which would require a more specific distinction to earn a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that this retrieves details for a single transcript identified by name, whereas 'meet_v2_list_transcripts' might be used to browse multiple transcripts. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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