Skip to main content
Glama
Angad-2002

Attendee MCP Server

by Angad-2002

get_meeting_transcript

Retrieve transcribed text from recorded meetings using a bot ID. This tool extracts conversation content for documentation, analysis, or review purposes.

Instructions

Get the transcript from a meeting bot

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bot_idYesID of the bot whose transcript to retrieve

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that executes the get_meeting_transcript tool. It validates the bot_id input, fetches the transcript via API, and formats the response using a helper.
    private async getMeetingTranscript(args: Record<string, unknown>) {
      const bot_id = args.bot_id as string;
      
      if (!bot_id || typeof bot_id !== 'string') {
        throw new Error("Missing or invalid required parameter: bot_id");
      }
      
      const data = await this.makeApiRequest(`/api/v1/bots/${bot_id}/transcript`);
    
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: this.formatTranscriptResponse(data, bot_id),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • The tool schema definition including name, description, and input schema (requires bot_id string). Registered in the ListTools handler.
    {
      name: "get_meeting_transcript",
      description: "Get the transcript from a meeting bot",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          bot_id: {
            type: "string",
            description: "ID of the bot whose transcript to retrieve",
          },
        },
        required: ["bot_id"],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:413-414 (registration)
    The switch case in the CallToolRequestHandler that routes calls to the getMeetingTranscript handler function.
    case "get_meeting_transcript":
      return await this.getMeetingTranscript(args);

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get' implies a read operation, but doesn't cover aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the bot_id is invalid. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. However, it could be slightly more structured by including key details, but it earns high marks for brevity.

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 (a read operation with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., text, JSON), potential errors, or how it integrates with sibling tools. For a tool that likely returns data, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'bot_id' clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain where to find the bot_id or its format). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the action ('Get') and resource ('transcript from a meeting bot'), making the basic purpose clear. However, it's vague about what 'transcript' entails (e.g., full text, formatted, with timestamps) and doesn't distinguish it from siblings like 'get_chat_messages' or 'get_recording', which might overlap in function. This meets the minimum viable threshold but lacks specificity.

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 specify if this is for post-meeting retrieval only, or how it differs from 'get_chat_messages' (which might handle real-time chat). The description offers no context on prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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