Wistia MCP Server

Find Caption Matches

find_caption_matches

Read-onlyIdempotent

Locate exact caption text in Wistia media without editing. Returns matches with time coordinates and keeps fuzzy suggestions separate.

Instructions

Finds exact text in caption tracks without modifying them. Matching uses the same normalization, composite-media boundaries, and time coordinates as the targeted caption edit endpoint. Fuzzy alternatives are returned separately as suggestions and are never reported as exact matches. A resolved match means the wording was located; a later write can still fail authorization, version, or edit-boundary checks.

When more than 10 exact matches exist, use the one-based occurrence parameter to retrieve a specific later match.

Authentication and request validation failures apply to the whole request. Missing, inaccessible, or otherwise unreadable media are reported as per-media statuses without exposing whether an inaccessible ID exists.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read all folder and media data

Tokens with the "Act with a team member's permissions" permission (all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope) can also be used. Read-only account operation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end_ms`	No	Optional end of a time range used to disambiguate the match.
`account`	No	Named private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
`payload`	No	Complete JSON request body instead of body flags. Supports current nested customization, caption and nullable values.
`start_ms`	No	Optional start of a time range used to disambiguate the match.
`media_ids`	No	Explicit hashed IDs of the media whose captions should be searched.
`occurrence`	No	One-based exact occurrence to return, including occurrences after the first 10.
`target_text`	No	Exact caption wording to locate.
`payload_file`	No	Regular local JSON body file, at most 5 MB. Cannot be mixed with body flags or payload.
`language_code`	No	Exact IETF language tag. Omit when each media has only one caption track.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description goes well beyond them: it discloses match normalization, composite-media boundaries, the 10-match occurrence ceiling, whole-request auth/validation failure behavior, and per-media status reporting that hides whether an inaccessible ID exists. It also warns that a resolved match does not guarantee a later write succeeds.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then behavior, then the occurrence rule, then permissions. Every sentence carries information, though the permissions block is verbose and the normalization reference is slightly dense.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description still characterizes return behavior (exact matches vs. fuzzy suggestions, per-media statuses) and the occurrence-based retrieval. Combined with the auth requirements, it gives an agent enough to call the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by explaining the one-based `occurrence` parameter's purpose (retrieving matches past the first 10) and tying start_ms/end_ms to match disambiguation.

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 and resource ('Finds exact text in caption tracks') and immediately scopes it as non-mutating. It distinguishes itself from the caption edit endpoint it shares normalization semantics with, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings like edit_captions_text.

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?

Clearly frames the tool as the read/search counterpart to the targeted caption edit endpoint and explains the fuzzy-vs-exact split. However, it never explicitly routes the agent between this tool and other caption readers (list_captions, get_captions, list_all_captions), leaving that selection 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