@scriptivox/mcp-server

transcribe_cancel

Stop an in-progress transcription to free reserved balance. Idempotent cancellation returns 409 if the job is already finished.

Instructions

Cancel an in-flight Scriptivox transcription and release any reserved balance. Idempotent. Returns 409 CONFLICT on already-terminal jobs. Requires a configured API key.

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": {
      "transcription_id": "<transcription_id>"
    },
    "name": "transcribe_cancel"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`transcription_id`	Yes	The transcription ID to cancel (UUID).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.3Aug 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it explains idempotency, the balance-release side effect, the 409 behavior for terminal jobs, and the API key requirement. These are all meaningful behavioral facts beyond what the schema exposes.

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 adding a distinct fact: operation, side-effect, idempotency, failure behavior, and required auth. No fluff or redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter operation, the description covers what happens on success, a key error condition, and the auth requirement. It doesn't describe the success response payload, but with no output schema, this is a minor gap and none of the essential invocation details have a hole.

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 single parameter transcription_id is already fully described in the schema as a UUID, so description-level add-on is unnecessary. The description does not add further semantic guidance, which is fine given 100% schema coverage and one parameter.

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?

The description states a specific action, 'Cancel an in-flight Scriptivox transcription', and the resource state it applies to. It also adds the effect of releasing reserved balance, which differentiates it from terminal/cleanup operations like transcribe_delete.

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 description implies when to use the tool through 'in-flight' and notes that 'already-terminal jobs' return 409 CONFLICT. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools, such as checking status before canceling or using transcribe_delete for completed jobs, so the guidance is implied rather than fully explicit.

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

Deploy Server