Retrieve AI-generated meeting summaries, key points, and action items by providing a meeting ID.
Get the AI-generated summary, key points, and action items for a meeting
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| meeting_id | Yes | The Fathom meeting ID (get from list_meetings) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read operation and 'AI-generated' hints at a computed or cached summary, but there is no mention of freshness, availability of summaries, or any permissions required.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning and it communicates the tool's core return content immediately.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately names the return content (summary, key points, action items). It could be more complete by addressing the overlap with get_action_items, but the essential calling context is present.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the meeting_id parameter is documented with its source (list_meetings). The description itself adds no parameter-level details, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and names a clear resource: the AI-generated summary, key points, and action items for a meeting. It is clear, but it does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_action_items, which also covers action items.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given for when to use this tool versus get_action_items, get_transcript, or search_meetings. The only implicit context is 'for a meeting,' which does not help an agent decide between the overlapping siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.