Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Reedapt MCP server

Reedapt MCP server

Official
by Reedapt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get subtitles

get_subtitles
Read-only

Retrieve a completed dub's subtitles as SRT or WebVTT in the target or source language by providing the dub ID.

Instructions

A completed dub's subtitles as SRT or WebVTT text, in the dub's language or the original's.

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": {
      "dub_id": "<dub_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_subtitles"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dub_idYesThe dub's id, such as dub_…
formatNosrt
languageNotarget

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful precondition that only completed dubs have subtitles and that content can come from either the dub or source track, but says nothing about failure behavior for in-progress dubs, size, or timing data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every clause maps to a real decision the caller makes (resource, format, language). Nothing to trim.

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?

For a three-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the return representation (SRT/WebVTT text), the language axis, and the completion precondition. Only edge-case behavior for unfinished dubs is left unstated, which is a minor gap.

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?

Schema coverage is only 33% (only dub_id is documented), but the description compensates for the key gap: it explains that 'target' means the dub's language and 'source' means the original's, and that 'format' selects SRT vs WebVTT. Those opaque enum values are the main ambiguity and the description resolves them.

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?

Names the specific resource (a completed dub's subtitles) and the output encodings (SRT or WebVTT), so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It stops short of distinguishing itself from get_dub_files or get_transcript, which sit in the same neighborhood and could plausibly return similar artifacts.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'a completed dub's' implies a precondition (the dub must be finished) but doesn't state what happens otherwise, and no alternative tool is named for the transcript-vs-subtitles decision. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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