Specky

Batch Process Transcript Folder

sdd_batch_transcripts

Scans a folder for transcript files and generates structured specification packages for each using an automated pipeline.

Instructions

Scans a folder for transcript files (.vtt, .srt, .txt, .md) and runs the full SDD auto-pipeline for each one. Designed for Power Automate + OneDrive workflows where meeting transcripts are saved automatically to a shared folder. Each transcript becomes its own feature spec package.

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": {
      "transcripts_dir": "<transcripts_dir>"
    },
    "name": "sdd_batch_transcripts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`force`	No	Overwrite existing spec files if true
`spec_dir`	No	Spec directory path (relative to workspace root)	.specs
`transcripts_dir`	Yes	Path to folder containing transcript files (.vtt, .srt, .txt, .md) relative to workspace root. Example: 'transcripts' or 'OneDrive/Meeting Transcripts'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.4.0-rc.14May 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate potential state changes (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). The description adds that it runs an 'auto-pipeline' and creates 'feature spec packages' but does not detail side effects, resource usage, or error behavior. The description adds moderate value beyond annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core function followed by context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 no output schema, the description hints at output ('each transcript becomes its own feature spec package') but does not explain return format, error handling, or limitations. For a batch tool, more details on concurrency or file size limits would improve completeness. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds no further parameter meaning beyond stating that each transcript becomes a spec package. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema already provides sufficient semantics.

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?

The description clearly states it scans a folder for transcript files and runs the full SDD auto-pipeline for each, with specific file types listed. It provides context about Power Automate and OneDrive workflows, making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like sdd_auto_pipeline, though 'batch' implies multiple files.

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 mentions a typical use case (Power Automate + OneDrive workflows) but does not specify when to avoid using this tool or mention alternatives. It implies batch processing but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or when to choose batch over single-file tools.

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

Deploy Server