proofcut

by tydude001

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

transcribe

Destructive

Generate a transcript for a clip's media with Whisper and attach it, replacing any existing transcript.

Instructions

Transcribe a clip's own media with whisper, and attach the result.

attach_transcript's ASR-driven sibling: use that when the recording already has a transcript, this when it needs one made. Takes minutes on a long recording — there is no timeout, so let it run. Reports near_duplicates, suspect_durations, overlaps and repeats the same way attach_transcript does.

It replaces whatever transcript the clip already had, and it is the one mutation undo cannot reach: a transcript is its own file, so this writes neither the manifest nor the timeline and nothing is snapshotted. There is no cache either — a second call spends the same minutes again. get_transcript first if a transcript might already be there.

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.
`model`	No	The whisper model to run, e.g. `small.en`. Larger is slower, and there is no timeout.	turbo
`clip_id`	Yes	The clip whose own media whisper transcribes.
`language`	No	Force a language code, e.g. `en`. Unset, whisper detects it, which it gets wrong on short or noisy clips.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed13 schema fields changedv0.25.0Sep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / clip_id / description

Added value: +"The clip whose own media whisper transcribes."

removedInput schema / properties / clip_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Clip Id"
```

removedInput schema / properties / language / anyOf

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

addedInput schema / properties / language / description

Added value: +"Force a language code, e.g. `en`. Unset, whisper detects it, which it gets wrong on short or noisy clips."

removedInput schema / properties / language / title
```
Removed value: -"Language"
```
addedInput schema / properties / language / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

addedInput schema / properties / model / description

Added value: +"The whisper model to run, e.g. `small.en`. Larger is slower, and there is no timeout."

removedInput schema / properties / model / title
```
Removed value: -"Model"
```

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: -"transcribeArguments"
```

First observedv0.24.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that the tool replaces any existing transcript, is unreachable by undo, writes neither manifest nor timeline, has no cache, takes minutes, and has no timeout. These are critical behavioral facts that annotations alone would not convey.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then cleanly covers sibling selection, runtime expectations, destructive behavior, and undo/cache caveats. Every sentence adds distinct value, and the density is appropriate for a tool with this many behavioral implications.

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?

Given the annotations, output schema, and fully documented parameters, the description covers everything an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly: what it does, when to use it, what it destroys, how long it can take, and what to check beforehand. The mention of diagnostics like near_duplicates and overlaps compensates for not detailing the output, which the output schema already provides.

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?

Input schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a meaningful description. The tool description adds useful context around behavior and alternatives but does not add new parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Transcribe a clip's own media with whisper, and attach the result.' It also distinguishes itself from attach_transcript by naming the sibling and its purpose, so an agent can tell them apart immediately.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool versus attach_transcript: 'use that when the recording already has a transcript, this when it needs one made.' It also advises calling get_transcript first if a transcript might already exist, which is concrete pre-use guidance.

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

Deploy Server