proofcut

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

assets

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all clips and cards in a project with metadata, cue references, and playability status to show which assets are used.

Instructions

Every asset a cue can point at — clip or card — for an assets pane.

The cue vocabulary is clip_id or card:name, so this lists both: each clip with its probe metadata, transcript/description presence, role and media.playability verdict; each card with what it was made from, whether its files exist, and whether it has a re-author record. Every entry carries cues, how many cues reference it — "is this used" is the question an assets pane exists to answer. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	The project directory to act on. Omit it — the usual case — when this server is bound to a project (started as `proofcut -C DIR mcp`, or inside a project; `ping` says which): it then resolves to that one bound project, a relative path resolves against it, and a path outside it is refused by name. Unbound, `path` is the whole address and omitting it refuses rather than guessing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.25.0Sep 16, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / path / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / path / description

Added value: +"The project directory to act on. Omit it — the usual case — when this server is bound to a project (started as `proofcut -C DIR mcp`, or inside a project; `ping` says which): it then resolves to that one bound project, a relative path resolves against it, and a path outside it is refused by name. Unbound, `path` is the whole address and omitting it refuses rather than guessing."

removedInput schema / properties / path / title
```
Removed value: -"Path"
```

addedInput schema / properties / path / type

Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"assetsArguments"
```

First observedv0.24.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description repeats 'Read-only' but adds no further behavioral traits such as rate limits, auth needs, or side effects. It does describe output composition (probe metadata, playability, re-author record), but that is more output semantics than behavior, and with annotations covering safety, the extra value is limited.

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 sentences with the purpose front-loaded and supporting details following. The second sentence is long but dense and information-bearing; there is no fluff, though it could be slightly tightened.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the tool is a read-only list with no required parameters, the description sufficiently covers what the agent needs to know. It explains the main output categories (clip/card fields and cue counts), though it does not cover when to prefer this over sibling tools, which is already handled in usage guidelines.

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 single parameter `path` is fully documented in the input schema with detailed resolution semantics. The tool description adds nothing about `path`, so per the rule for >80% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description opens with 'Every asset a cue can point at — clip or card — for an assets pane,' which is a specific verb-resource statement. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like list_media by covering both clips and cards and including cue reference counts, so an agent can tell it apart 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'the question an assets pane exists to answer' provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server