pepys-mcp

Search within a transcript

search_transcript

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search within lengthy transcripts by phrase to retrieve only the matching timestamped segments, allowing quick location of quotes or topics without processing the entire document.

Instructions

Search inside a long transcript for a phrase and get back only the matching timestamped segments – locate a quote or topic in an hours-long recording without loading the whole transcript into context.

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": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_transcript"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes
`job_id`	Yes
`whole_word`	No
`max_results`	No
`case_sensitive`	No
`context_segments`	No	Also return this many neighbor segments around each hit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 11, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations confirm read-only and idempotent behavior; description adds that it returns timestamped segments and implies efficient partial retrieval. It does not contradict annotations but could further detail return format or pagination (e.g., max_results).

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key action and benefit. Every word serves a purpose, no extraneous information.

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?

Given 6 parameters and no output schema, description is too brief. It covers core function but omits parameter details and output structure. Adequate for basic understanding but incomplete for full agent autonomy.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 17% (only context_segments described). Description only implies 'phrase' corresponds to the 'query' parameter. No explanation of job_id, whole_word, case_sensitive, or max_results, leaving agent unclear on how to configure search.

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?

Description clearly states it searches within a transcript for a phrase and returns matching timestamped segments. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_transcription' (whole transcript) by specifying the focused search capability, and emphasizes use for long recordings.

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?

Description hints at when to use: 'without loading the whole transcript into context' suggests it's for targeted extraction. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools like 'get_transcription', leaving some ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server