Skip to main content
Glama
calebn

Podcast MCP

by calebn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

preview_inaudible_cut_tool

Preview an inaudible cut snap (±80ms) for a proposed range to check transitions before applying edits. Ideal for quick cleanups, not multi-second narrative handoffs.

Instructions

Dry-run local inaudible-cut snap (~±80ms) for a proposed range.

Not a multi-second narrative handoff planner. For leave-a-beat / clean-up-the- transition / punchline-to-pivot bounds use suggest_handoff_cut_tool.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYes
startYes
speakerNo
timelineNo
track_idNo
project_pathNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • 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"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "project_path",
-  "start",
-  "end"
-]New value: +[
+  "start",
+  "end"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does disclose key behavior: the operation is a 'Dry-run' (non-mutating) with a stated snap tolerance (~±80ms). It omits auth/permission requirements and how it interacts with session state, but the dry-run and tolerance disclosures are the crucial traits for correct invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the exclusion. Every phrase earns its place, though the literal newlines and double-backtick formatting are slightly awkward.

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 not be explained, and the description adequately covers purpose, non-mutating nature, and routing. The main gap is the undocumented parameters, but for a preview tool the description is otherwise complete enough to call correctly.

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 0% and there are 6 parameters, so the description must compensate but largely does not. It only implies start/end via 'proposed range'; speaker, timeline, track_id, and project_path are undocumented in both schema and description.

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+resource ('Dry-run local inaudible-cut snap ~±80ms for a proposed range') and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling it is not ('Not a multi-second narrative handoff planner'). An agent can pick this apart from suggest_handoff_cut_tool without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the alternative (suggest_handoff_cut_tool) and the conditions that select it ('leave-a-beat / clean-up-the-transition / punchline-to-pivot bounds'). Both when-not and the alternative are stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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