Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to proofcut

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      AI-native timeline editor for short-form video. Your agent cuts, captions, adds motion graphics and renders against a real, editable timeline over MCP — not a render queue. Human-in-the-loop by design: it calls request_review and waits while you supervise in a browser. Local-first and AGPL; your footage never leaves your machine.
      1
      AGPL 3.0
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Local-first AI video editing engine controlled by MCP-compatible AI hosts, enabling AI to inspect footage, propose edits, modify multitrack projects, and render locally while keeping user control.
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Video player for humans and AI. GUI + CLI + a built-in MCP server (39 tools) to drive playback, clip, transcribe, and search your media library from Claude, Cursor, or any MCP client. Local Whisper subtitles. MIT, local-first.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      An MCP server that gives AI agents a stateful multi-track video editor powered by MLT, enabling them to assemble timelines, add media and text, apply filters and transforms, preview downscaled frames, and render final videos to disk.
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 132 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    The descriptions carefully distinguish many tools, but with 132 tools there are several overlapping families: multiple *_ls read-only listers, several *_sheet visual inspection tools (shot_sheet, footage_sheet, contact_sheet, reframe_sheet, graphic_sheet, spot_frames), and many *_check verifiers (verify, check_frames, film_check, finish_check, hold_check). The set is mostly separable by domain, but an agent has many chances to misselect among closely related lifecycle and inspection tools.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    All names use snake_case, which is readable, but the pattern is mixed: verb_noun (cut_by_transcript, add_captions, build_shots), noun_verb (cue_add, graphic_ls), bare nouns (assets, events, fonts, synopsis), and one-word verbs (undo, export, verify). There is no single predictable convention like list_x/get_x/create_x throughout.

    Tool Count1/5

    132 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server and far exceeds the 50+ threshold in the rubric for a severe mismatch. Even for a complex video-proofing pipeline, the surface is enormous and likely to overwhelm tool selection and maintenance.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface is unusually deep across the proofcut domain: project init/migration, media import, transcription, cutting, cues, overlays, graphics/cards, audio beds, holds, reframing, export, verification, and review rounds. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit multi-project listing/management and no general multi-track editing), but the core lifecycle is thoroughly covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessResponsive