Skip to main content
Glama

get_webex_attachment_action

Retrieve form data submitted when a user clicks an Adaptive Card button. Uses the action ID from a Webex webhook to fetch the submitted inputs.

Instructions

Retrieve the form data submitted when a user clicks an Adaptive Card button.

This MCP server makes outbound calls to Webex — it does NOT receive inbound webhook events. The action_id must be obtained externally: your own bot application (a separate HTTP server with a public HTTPS endpoint) receives the webhook POST from Webex, extracts the "id" field from the payload, and then supplies that action_id here so this tool can fetch the full submission.

Flow: 1. User clicks a card button in Webex. 2. Webex POSTs the event to your bot's registered webhook endpoint. 3. Your bot extracts action_id from payload["data"]["id"]. 4. Your bot (or an AI agent) calls this tool with that action_id. 5. This tool calls GET /attachment/actions/{id} and returns the inputs.

A webhook must be registered via create_webex_webhook with resource="attachmentActions" and event="created" for step 2 to occur — without it, card submissions are silently dropped by Webex.

Args: action_id: ID of the attachment action to retrieve (required). Comes from payload["data"]["id"] in the webhook POST your bot application receives from Webex.

Returns: Standardized response dictionary with success/error information. The data dict contains the submitted form inputs under the "inputs" key, along with the associated messageId, roomId, and personId.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
action_idYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool makes outbound calls to Webex (not receiving inbound events), explains the return format with keys like inputs, messageId, etc., and mentions the silent failure if no webhook is registered. Slight deduction for not addressing rate limits or authentication details, but overall very transparent.

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 relatively long but well-structured with clear sections (intro, flow, details, args, returns). Every sentence adds value, with no filler. Could be slightly more concise, but the structure aids readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (retrieving card submissions dependent on external webhooks), the description covers the entire process: prerequisite, parameter source, execution flow, and return structure. No output schema is provided, but the description lists the key return fields (inputs, messageId, roomId, personId), making the tool self-contained.

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 0% for the action_id parameter (only type and required defined). However, the description extensively explains the parameter: required, its source (payload["data"]["id"] from the webhook POST), and how to obtain it. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's minimal definition.

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 explicitly states the tool retrieves form data from Adaptive Card button clicks, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle other Webex operations (e.g., messages, rooms, webhooks). The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'attachment action' are specific and non-ambiguous.

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?

The description provides a detailed 5-step flow explaining when to use the tool (after a webhook event), including the prerequisite of registering a webhook via create_webex_webhook. It explicitly describes how to obtain the action_id from an external bot application and notes that without a webhook, card submissions are dropped. This is excellent guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/WebexCommunity/webex-bot-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server