Cdaf

CDAF — Cached Descriptive Asset Files

A .cdaf file is a timestamped, pre-computed description of a video, sitting next to it with the same basename (clip.mp4 → clip.cdaf). Reading it costs a few hundred text tokens; analyzing the video directly costs orders of magnitude more (~263 tokens per second of footage on Gemini-class models). Always prefer the sidecar when it is fresh.

Format spec and tooling: https://github.com/UditAkhourii/cdaf

The rule

Before analyzing ANY video file (.mp4, .mov, .mkv, .webm, .avi, .m4v):

1. Check for a sidecar: same directory, same basename, .cdaf extension.
2. Verify freshness before trusting it (see below). A stale sidecar describes an older version of the video — using it is worse than not having one.
3. If fresh: read the sidecar instead of processing the video. Use it as the account of what the video contains — within the limits below.
4. If missing or stale: generate one (see below) so the cost is paid once. If you cannot generate, fall back to direct video analysis.

Verifying freshness

The sidecar header carries bytes (file size) and sha256 (content hash) of the exact video it describes. Verification never needs an API key or network access.

• Cheap check (usually enough): compare the video's current file size to the header's bytes value. Different size → provably stale.
• Strict check: cdaf validate <video> (exit 0 = fresh), or hash the file yourself and compare to the header's sha256:
  • PowerShell: (Get-FileHash clip.mp4 -Algorithm SHA256).Hash.ToLower()
  • POSIX: sha256sum clip.mp4 / shasum -a 256 clip.mp4
• Use the strict check when the decision is expensive to get wrong (publishing, final edits); the cheap check suffices for exploration.

Reading a sidecar

It is plain UTF-8 text — use the Read tool directly, or cdaf read <video> (which verifies the hash automatically and refuses to print a stale sidecar).

Format: a key: value header between --- CDAF/1.0 and ---, then markdown:

• ## Summary — what the clip is
• ## Segments — [MM:SS.d-MM:SS.d] description lines covering the whole video (see the trust note below before cutting on these timestamps)
• ## Transcript — spoken words with timestamps (or (no speech))
• ## On-screen Text — visible text with timestamps (or (none))
• ## Tags — retrieval keywords

How much to trust a fresh sidecar

Freshness proves the sidecar describes these exact bytes. It does not prove the description is complete or correct — it is generated text, the record of one model's pass. Three limits matter when a mistake is expensive:

• Timestamps are approximate. Boundaries inferred by a model drift (over a second on measured clips), miss real cuts, and occasionally mark cuts that do not exist. They are fine for locating, ranking, and rough trims. Before cutting on them, verify against the container:

  ffmpeg -v error -i clip.mp4 -vf "select='gt(scene,0.1)',metadata=print:file=-" -f null -

• Descriptions can add, not just omit. Shown a whole video at once, a model may narrate the outcome a clip implies but never shows — reporting that a task was completed when the footage only shows it being started. Such entries are fluent, specific, and indistinguishable from correct ones. Treat any claim that something was finished, fixed, repaired, or achieved as unverified: check the frames before relying on it, and say the sidecar is your source when you report it. An omission is a visible gap; an addition reads exactly like a fact.

• Fine visual state is unreliable. Strike-through and other mark-up on a list (crossed out, checked, highlighted), small or stylised text, and subtle motion are often missed or reported at chance. Incidental background text on packaging or labels has produced confident phantom brand names. If such a detail carries the meaning of the shot, look at the frame.

Provenance keys. When a producer records how the body was made, x- keys tell you which parts were measured rather than inferred:

Absent these keys, assume the weaker case: inferred boundaries, whole-video context, and guessed transcript times.

None of this argues for re-watching by default — that would forfeit the entire saving. Verify the specific claim your decision rests on, not the whole clip.