SuperPost

Check exact source transcription

get_source_transcription

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads the status of a transcription job bound to an exact sourceAssetId and expectedRevision. The current source grant and revision are checked again. A completed current-revision transcript is returned with a 12,000-character limit; old-revision transcript text is withheld. Status reads do not start or retry work.

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": {
      "sourceAssetId": "<sourceAssetId>",
      "jobId": "<jobId>"
    },
    "name": "get_source_transcription"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobId`	Yes
`sourceAssetId`	Yes
`expectedRevision`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobId`	Yes
`budget`	Yes
`reason`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`retryable`	Yes
`retryAfter`	No
`transcript`	No
`sourceAssetId`	Yes
`sourceRevision`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses real behavior: the grant and revision are re-validated at read time, transcripts are truncated at 12,000 characters, and old-revision text is withheld. That is meaningful operational context the annotations cannot convey. It does not enumerate the possible job statuses returned, which is the remaining behavioral gap.

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?

Four short sentences, each doing distinct work: purpose, re-validation, return-content rules, and the negative boundary. The exclusions are front-loaded rather than buried, and there is no redundant restatement of the title or name.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description still usefully covers truncation and old-revision withholding. What it leaves implicit is whether jobId must correspond to the given sourceAssetId and what status values the read can report. For a three-parameter read tool this is close to complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does: sourceAssetId is framed as an exact binding, expectedRevision as the revision re-checked against the current one, and jobId as the transcription job identity. It adds semantics the bare UUID/hash regexes do not. Format-level detail is left to the schema, which is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Reads the status of a transcription job', scoped to an exact sourceAssetId and expectedRevision. The closing line 'Status reads do not start or retry work' implicitly separates it from the sibling request_source_transcription, so an agent can distinguish read-polling from job creation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The final sentence establishes the key usage boundary: this is a status read only, never a start or retry action, which routes the agent elsewhere when work needs to be kicked off. It stops short of naming request_source_transcription explicitly as the alternative, so the routing is implied rather than stated.

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

All SuperPost tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?