Loom Transcript MCP

getLoomComments

Extract comments from Loom videos by providing the video URL to retrieve discussion threads and user feedback.

Instructions

Get comments from a Loom video URL

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": {
      "videoUrl": "<videoUrl>"
    },
    "name": "getLoomComments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`videoUrl`	Yes	The Loom video URL (e.g., https://www.loom.com/share/123456)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.5Jan 14, 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. While 'Get comments' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what format the comments are returned in. This leaves the agent with insufficient information about how the tool behaves.

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 a single, clear sentence that efficiently communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what format the comments are returned in, whether authentication is required, or how to handle different video states. Given the lack of structured information elsewhere, the description should provide more context.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'videoUrl' well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 comments') and target resource ('from a Loom video URL'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling tool 'getLoomTranscript', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for usage. With a sibling tool 'getLoomTranscript' available, this represents a significant gap in helping the agent choose appropriately.

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

Deploy Server