Podcast MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

export_transcript

Export a podcast transcript as Markdown and return the saved file path, so you can use or share the transcript outside the MCP workflow.

Instructions

Export the transcript as Markdown and return the file path.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_path`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.1Oct 19, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / project_path / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / project_path / default
```
Added value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / project_path / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "project_path"
-]
```
First observedv0.1.0Sep 20, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the output format and that a file path is returned, but says nothing about where the file is written, whether it overwrites an existing export, or what permissions/scope the export uses.

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?

One tight sentence that front-loads the action, output format, and result. No filler.

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?

The output schema exists, so the return value needn't be restated, and this is a simple one-parameter tool. Still, the undocumented optional parameter and absent usage guidance leave gaps an agent would have to guess at.

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?

The single parameter project_path has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned in the description at all; its meaning, default behavior, and what happens when it is null are left entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb ('Export') and resource ('the transcript') plus the output format (Markdown) and the return artifact (file path). It does not distinguish itself from neighbors like get_transcript or export_audio_tool, so an agent must infer which export route to take.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named (e.g., get_transcript for reading versus export for producing a file), and no prerequisites stated. The agent gets a purpose but no routing logic.

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

Deploy Server