Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fathom-Simple-MCP

Fathom-Simple-MCP

by druellan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

get_meeting_transcript

Read-only

Retrieve a meeting transcript with essential metadata (id, title, participants, dates) using a recording ID.

Instructions

Retrieve meeting transcript with essential metadata (id, title, participants, dates).

Example: get_meeting_transcript([recording_id])

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": {
      "recording_id": "<recording_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_meeting_transcript"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recording_idYesThe recording identifier

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description doesn't add behavioral details beyond retrieving data, but it doesn't mislead. Minimal added value over annotations.

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?

Two-line description is concise and includes an example. No unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more informative.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description provides the core purpose and an example. Given the presence of an output schema and only one parameter, it is moderately complete but could elaborate on what the transcript includes (e.g., if it returns the full text or just metadata).

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 coverage is 100%, and the description merely adds an example call without clarifying parameter semantics beyond the schema's description. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves a meeting transcript with essential metadata, using a specific verb and resource. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_meeting_details, the focus on 'transcript' sets it apart from other meeting tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_meeting_details or list_meetings. The example shows syntax but lacks context for selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools