# CutAgent vs Eddie AI for DaVinci Resolve: Which One Fits?

> **Quick answer:** CutAgent is a macOS-only agent, 29 to 299 euros a month, that executes DaVinci Resolve edits from natural language with a review step. Eddie AI runs on Mac and Windows, free to $1,250 a month, and builds rough cuts from raw footage via a bridge extension. Neither teaches Resolve; both automate editing.

*Published by [TryUncle](https://tryuncle.com) — the on-screen assistant that teaches DaVinci Resolve on your own screen.*
*Updated 2026-07-22 · CutAgent and Eddie AI pricing, platform support, refund/cancellation policy, and product claims as published on each company's own site (July 2026) · Canonical: https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/cutagent-vs-eddie-ai-for-davinci-resolve*

You typed "CutAgent vs Eddie AI" because you found two products that both claim to put an AI agent inside your DaVinci Resolve workflow, and neither company's homepage is going to tell you honestly where it loses to the other. That's what this comparison is for.

Nobody neutral has actually put these two side by side yet. Search around and you'll find CutAgent's own pitch, Eddie AI's own pitch, and a handful of roundups that mention one or the other in passing. You won't find a page that pulls both FAQs, both pricing tables, and both sets of honest limitations into one place and just lays them out. So that's exactly what this page does.

## What Are CutAgent and Eddie AI, in One Sentence Each?

CutAgent is a macOS desktop app that connects directly to your open DaVinci Resolve project and turns a typed or described instruction into an actual change on your timeline, with a review step before anything lands, according to [CutAgent's own site](https://www.cutagent.ai/).

Eddie AI is a separate desktop application, not native to Resolve at all, that imports footage or sequences from your Resolve bin, builds a rough cut through a chat interface using transcripts and clip content, then exports the finished sequence back into that same bin, per [Eddie AI's own DaVinci Resolve workflow page](https://www.heyeddie.ai/workflows/davinci-resolve).

That difference in mechanism matters more than it sounds. CutAgent edits the timeline you already have. Eddie AI builds you a new one and hands it over. **CutAgent moves your existing timeline. Eddie AI builds you a new one and hands it back.** Everything else in this comparison, price, platform, risk, what each one is actually good at, follows from that one structural choice.

## The Quick Comparison, Side by Side

Here's the full shape of it before the detail, so you're not scrolling back up while reading the rest of this piece.

| | CutAgent | Eddie AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What it does | Executes typed instructions directly on your open timeline | Imports footage, builds a rough cut by chat, exports it back |
| Touches your existing timeline? | Yes, in place, with a review step first | No, it builds a new sequence and hands it to you |
| Platform | macOS, with Windows listed on its roadmap (no date, per its own FAQ) | Mac and Windows, native apps for both |
| DaVinci Resolve edition | Free or Studio, version 20+ | Free or Studio |
| Best documented strength | Turning transcript-level instructions into rough timeline actions | Logging and rough-cutting long-form interview or podcast footage |
| Price | 29 to 299 euros/month | Free (pay-as-you-go) to $1,250/month |
| Independent hands-on test | None confirmed as of this writing | Yes, a named, documented test with both wins and failures |

Read the last row again. One of these two products has a real, named editor's account of what happened when they tried it on actual footage. The other one, as of this writing, doesn't. That's not a knock on CutAgent specifically, it's a newer product, but it's exactly the kind of gap a neutral comparison should say out loud instead of papering over.

## How Does a CutAgent Session Actually Work?

Mechanically, per CutAgent's own materials, a session runs like this:

1. You open DaVinci Resolve with a project loaded, and CutAgent's desktop app running alongside it, connected through what CutAgent calls a local desktop bridge.
2. You type or describe an instruction, either something specific ("remove silences longer than 1.5 seconds from this interview track") or something broader ("build a rough cut from these selects that hits the three main talking points").
3. CutAgent reads your active timeline, selected clips, transcripts, and markers, and builds what it calls an edit plan rather than an immediate change.
4. That plan translates into what CutAgent describes as controlled DaVinci Resolve operations, actual timeline actions rather than a separate file handed back to you.
5. Before anything lands, CutAgent shows review and verifier summaries meant to let you understand what changed before export, with flagged decisions that need your approval.
6. You accept or reject specific changes. Only then does the timeline reflect the edit.
7. For repeat tasks, you can save custom skills, reusable instructions you fire again on future projects, and CutAgent's own site describes an installable command-line component so other AI agents can call those same skills.

That review step is the single most defensible design decision in the product. An AI tool that silently rewrites your timeline is a liability. One that proposes a change and waits for your sign-off is a fundamentally different thing, provided you actually read the review instead of clicking approve out of habit.

CutAgent's own site states it coordinates operations across "editing, color grading, multicam, Fairlight, and Fusion," a broad claim of reach across nearly every page in Resolve. Worth knowing before you lean on that claim too hard: DaVinci Resolve's own scripting interface, the layer most third-party automation tools build on, covers roughly 30 to 40 percent of everything Resolve can do, concentrated in delivery, project management, metadata, and markers, according to [Wild Lion Media's detailed guide to the scripting API](https://wildlion.media/davinci-resolve-python-scripting-the-complete-guide-to-the-api/). CutAgent's own materials don't disclose whether it works through that same API or a different automation method, but any third-party tool operating inside Resolve without direct source access to the app is almost certainly working within some version of those same documented constraints. Where CutAgent's claims are most credible is transcript-driven timeline assembly, since that's exactly the kind of clip selection and marker work that sits inside the API's proven strengths. Claims about deep Fusion node composites or Fairlight mixing decisions built entirely from a text prompt deserve more skepticism until an independent reviewer confirms them directly.

Quoted verbatim from CutAgent's own FAQ, on version and edition support: "Yes. CutAgent works with DaVinci Resolve 20 or later, including both DaVinci Resolve Free and DaVinci Resolve Studio, on macOS." That's a genuinely useful claim relative to the rest of the AI-editing-agent category, since several direct rivals gate themselves to Resolve's paid Studio edition.

## How Does an Eddie AI Session Actually Work?

Eddie AI's mechanism is a bridge, not a plugin that lives entirely inside Resolve. You run Eddie as its own desktop application, and a script-based extension is what lets the two talk to each other. Per [Eddie AI's own help documentation on installing the extension](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/11272954-install-and-enable-eddie-s-davinci-resolve-extension), here's the setup and the workflow:

1. Download and open the Eddie desktop app, version 2.1.11 or later, on Mac or Windows.
2. In Eddie, go to Help > Install Resolve Extension.
3. Open DaVinci Resolve, then enable the extension via Workspace > Scripts > Eddie AI.
4. Back in Eddie, create a new project and click the Resolve icon in the import box to pull clips, multicams, and timelines from your open Resolve bin.
5. Work your edit inside Eddie's chat interface, describing what you want in plain language.
6. Export the finished sequence back into that same Resolve bin, timecode, frame rate, and resolution preserved, with automatic relinking to your original media.

What Eddie AI is actually built for is a narrow, well-defined job: logging and rough-cutting talking-head and interview-style footage fast. Its workflow modes include a rough cut mode built for docu-style stories with B-roll placement, automatic soundbite identification and filler-word removal, multicam syncing across up to six cameras with speaker identification, and a "Night Shift" feature that processes a folder of raw footage overnight so a logged, organized project is waiting for you by morning. None of that is grading, sound design, or motion graphics work. It's the tedious front half of an edit: watching hours of footage to find the parts worth using.

Alex Terekhov, Eddie AI's co-founder and Chief AI Scientist, described the specific engineering challenge behind that rough cut mode directly, quoted verbatim from [RedShark News's coverage of the v2 launch](https://www.redsharknews.com/eddie-ai-ai-powered-assistant-video-editor-launches-eddie-v2): "The new rough cut mode has been a technical feat to adapt LLMs to handle creating cohesive edits over long durations from a large amount of source material." Feeding a language model hours of raw dialogue and getting back a coherent cut, not just a pile of trimmed clips, is genuinely harder than it sounds.

The actual handoff back into Resolve is simpler than it might sound. Per [Eddie AI's own help center walkthrough of the export process](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/9944875-export-edit-sequences-into-davinci-resolve), you export an FCXML file from Eddie, then in Resolve go to File > Import > Timeline and select it. Resolve then prompts you to locate the original clips if it can't find them automatically, and you point it at your media to relink. It's the same manual relink step editors already know from moving projects between any two NLEs, not a proprietary Eddie-only mechanism.

Worth knowing if you or your studio also cut in Adobe Premiere Pro or Apple Final Cut Pro: Eddie AI's export isn't locked to DaVinci Resolve. Per its own [help center article on one-click export](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/10328445-one-click-export-of-your-edit-to-resolve-adobe-and-fcp), the same rough cut can be sent to Resolve, Premiere, or FCP from the same project. CutAgent has no equivalent. It's built specifically to operate inside an open DaVinci Resolve project, so a studio that splits work across multiple NLEs gets a real, if narrow, edge from Eddie AI's side that CutAgent's tighter Resolve integration doesn't offer back.

Per [CineD's coverage of the extension's release](https://www.cined.com/eddie-ai-extension-for-davinci-resolve-released-virtual-editing-assistant/), processing happens locally on your computer rather than in the cloud, with the completed sequence returned to your Resolve timeline once you're done. That's a meaningfully different risk profile from an agent that reasons entirely on a remote server, and it's worth keeping in mind when the data-handling section further down compares both tools directly.

## Which Platforms and DaVinci Resolve Versions Does Each Support?

This is where the two diverge sharply, and it's worth stating plainly since it rules one of them out entirely for a meaningful share of readers.

| | CutAgent | Eddie AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| macOS | Yes | Yes, Apple Silicon and Intel |
| Windows | Listed on CutAgent's roadmap, no committed date, per its own FAQ | Yes, native app |
| DaVinci Resolve version | 20 or later | Works with current Resolve releases |
| DaVinci Resolve edition | Free or Studio | Free or Studio |
| Internet required | Not disclosed in public materials | Yes, for AI processing; footage itself stays local |

Quoted verbatim, again, from CutAgent's own FAQ on the Windows question specifically: "Not yet. CutAgent is currently focused on macOS so we can deliver the fastest and most reliable experience with DaVinci Resolve. Windows support is already on our roadmap and planned for the future." That's an honest answer from the company, and it's also a real, immediate dealbreaker for a large share of DaVinci Resolve's total user base, since Resolve itself runs natively on Windows and a meaningful chunk of colorists and editors build their whole rig around a Windows GPU setup specifically for grading work. A fast-moving product's platform support can change between when a page like this one is written and when you read it, so if Windows availability is the deciding factor for you, confirm it directly on CutAgent's own site before you commit either way.

Eddie AI doesn't have that gap. It ships native applications for both Mac and Windows, per [Eddie AI's own site](https://www.heyeddie.ai/), so a PC-based editor gets full access to the DaVinci Resolve extension and every chat-driven editing mode CutAgent's macOS-only build can't offer them at all.

Both tools do agree on one thing worth naming as a genuine point in favor of each: neither one forces you onto Resolve's paid Studio edition. That's not universal in this category. Sottocut, a direct rival to both covered in more detail further down, requires Resolve Studio 21 specifically, meaning you'd need to have already spent $295 on the paid version of Resolve, per [Blackmagic's own Studio product page](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/studio), before Sottocut will even launch.

## What Does Each One Actually Cost?

The two aren't priced on the same axis at all, and comparing headline numbers without understanding the shape of each pricing model will give you a wrong answer.

CutAgent runs four tiers, priced in euros, per its own pricing page:

| Plan | Price | What it includes |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Hobby | 29 euros/month | Standard usage, described by CutAgent as best for occasional edits |
| Creator | 99 euros/month | 5x more monthly usage than Hobby, CutAgent's own recommended tier |
| Studio | 299 euros/month | 20x more usage than Hobby, priority support |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom limits, dedicated onboarding, done-for-you custom skills, aimed at teams |

The honest gap in that table is that "usage" is never defined in concrete units anywhere on CutAgent's own pricing page. Not minutes of footage, not number of projects, not number of AI operations, just a multiplier on an undefined baseline. There's also no published free trial or free tier anywhere on CutAgent's site, so testing whether its edit plans match your own editorial judgment means committing at least 29 euros up front.

Eddie AI meters by export volume instead, per [its own pricing page](https://www.heyeddie.ai/pricing):

| Plan | Price | Exports included | Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Pay As You Go | $0/month | Pay $15 per credit as needed | No subscription required, genuinely free to test |
| Pro | $167/month, billed yearly | 120 exports/year | Multicams, sequence editing, BRAW/R3D support |
| Pro+ | $333/month, billed yearly | 300 exports/year | Bigger project sizes, premium AI models |
| Ultra | $1,250/month, billed yearly | 1,200 exports/year, includes 5 seats | Largest project sizes, most advanced AI models |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom | Centralized admin, on-your-cloud hosting, SSO |

Worth flagging honestly: earlier coverage of Eddie's version 2.0 launch, including [CineD's article on the release](https://www.cined.com/eddie-ai-extension-for-davinci-resolve-released-virtual-editing-assistant/), described a cheaper tier structure, a $25-a-month Plus plan and a $100-a-month Pro plan. That pricing no longer matches Eddie's live page as of this writing, so treat the numbers above, pulled directly from Eddie's current pricing page, as the ones to verify before you commit, since a fast-moving product's rate card can change between when an article is written and when you read it. The same caveat applies to CutAgent's table above it. Check both companies' current pricing directly before you subscribe to either.

Here's the actual math, since eyeballing monthly numbers hides how differently these two scale. **Eddie AI's price scales with how many exports you push through it in a year. CutAgent's price scales with a usage multiplier that's never defined in concrete units anywhere in its own materials.** At the low end, Eddie AI's free pay-as-you-go tier beats CutAgent's 29-euro Hobby tier on pure entry cost, since you can test Eddie against your own footage for the price of one or two credits before committing to anything. At the high end, the comparison flips hard: Eddie AI's Ultra tier runs $1,250 a month, more than four times CutAgent's top Studio tier at 299 euros, because Eddie's pricing is built around production-house export volume rather than a general usage allowance. If your actual workload sits in the middle, dozens of edits a month but not hundreds of exports a year, CutAgent's Creator tier at 99 euros a month is a more predictable number to budget against than trying to estimate how many of Eddie's metered exports you'll actually use.

There's a wrinkle in that metered model worth knowing before you assume it's a straightforward per-export toll. Per [Eddie AI's own help center article on cost and credits](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/10076713-cost-price-subscribe-credit-pause-or-freeze-unsubscribe), a credit is deducted once, when you first export from a project, not once per export event. Its own documentation states this plainly: export the same project ten times for ten different revisions, and "1 credit will be deducted," not ten. Export from five separate source projects, though, and that's five credits, one per project. That distinction is worth real money if your workflow involves re-cutting the same timeline more than once, a vertical version and a horizontal version pulled from the same interview, say, or three rounds of client notes on one edit, since none of those re-exports cost anything further once the first credit's spent.

The same help center article also draws a project-size line that the pricing page itself doesn't mention: a b-roll logging project on the pay-as-you-go tier tops out at 25 files, while a Pro subscription raises that ceiling to 400 files. If you're shooting a multicam interview with five angles across a few hours of footage, 25 files disappears fast, and the free pay-as-you-go tier that looked like the obvious way to test Eddie AI against your own material turns out to gate you on project size before it gates you on cost.

Run the actual break-even math and a real threshold falls out of it. Eddie's Pro tier costs $167 a month for 120 project credits a year, an average of ten new projects a month. Divide $167 by the $15 pay-as-you-go rate and you get a little over eleven. Below roughly eleven new projects a month, paying per credit is cheaper than the Pro subscription. Cross that line and Pro's flat rate starts winning. **A subscription only beats pay-as-you-go once your monthly project count clears its own break-even point, and for Eddie AI's Pro tier that point is about eleven new projects a month, not the ten its own "120 a year" framing implies.** CutAgent has no equivalent threshold to calculate, since its usage multiplier isn't denominated in projects, exports, or any other disclosed unit, so there's no way to run the same math against its tiers at all.

| | CutAgent | Eddie AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Pricing model | Tiered usage multiplier, undefined units | Metered by project credit, unlimited re-exports of the same project |
| Cheapest entry point | 29 euros/month, no free tier | $0/month, pay-per-credit, capped at 25 files per project |
| Cost at heavy volume | 299 euros/month top tier | Up to $1,250/month |
| Free trial | None published | Genuine free pay-as-you-go tier |
| Team seats | Enterprise only, custom | Ultra plan includes 5 seats |

## What Happens If You Want a Refund, a Pause, or Just to Cancel?

Pricing tables tell you what you'll pay going in. They don't tell you what happens if the tool doesn't work out, and the two companies handle that question very differently.

CutAgent's own [refund policy page](https://www.cutagent.ai/en/refund-policy) states the general rule plainly: "Payments are non-refundable except where required by law or approved by the operator at the operator's discretion." That sounds like a dead end until you read the next part. EU consumers get a genuine legal backstop, a 14-day right of withdrawal on the initial purchase of a digital service, and CutAgent's own policy names duplicate charges, billing errors, and accidental renewals as cases it reviews individually rather than refusing outright. The catch on that EU withdrawal right: if you've already used hosted features during those 14 days, CutAgent's policy states you "may be responsible for the proportionate value of services already provided or consumed," so withdrawing on day 13 after running the agent on three real projects isn't the same as a clean, no-questions refund. To request anything, you email support@cutagent.ai with your account email, charge date, invoice or payment identifier, and a description of the issue, and cancelling on its own only stops future billing. It doesn't refund the current period or any hosted usage you've already burned through.

Eddie AI's policy is shorter and blunter. Per [its own help center article on billing](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/10076713-cost-price-subscribe-credit-pause-or-freeze-unsubscribe), stated in four words with no qualification: "We do not offer refunds." Cancel before your renewal date through the Help menu's Unsubscribe option and you avoid the next charge, but nothing comes back for the current period. What Eddie AI does offer instead of a refund is a pause: you can freeze a subscription for up to three months, during which you aren't charged and your unused credits sit frozen rather than expiring, ready to use again once you resume.

**Neither company will give your money back once you've used the product, but they get there by different doors.** CutAgent's door is a discretionary, case-by-case review with a real EU legal right sitting behind it for the first two weeks. Eddie AI's door is closed outright, a flat no-refunds policy, with a pause option as the closest thing to a safety valve if you just need to stop paying for a few months without losing what you've already bought.

That's exactly why Eddie AI's pay-as-you-go tier matters more than it looks on the pricing table. It's not just the cheapest entry point, it's the only real way to limit your exposure on a product with a stated no-refunds policy, since you're never committing to a monthly charge you can't get back if the first project doesn't land. CutAgent has no equivalent pay-as-you-go option, so testing it means committing to at least a month of its Hobby tier and leaning on the EU withdrawal right or a discretionary billing-error review if it doesn't work out, not a built-in low-commitment tier designed for exactly that.

## Which One Is Actually Faster for a Rough Cut?

Eddie AI, without much competition, because that's the one job it's built entirely around. Feed it a folder of raw interview footage before you go to sleep, and its Night Shift feature parses, syncs, logs, and rough-cuts it overnight, so a structured project is waiting when you sit down.

CutAgent's own materials describe a similar goal, building a rough cut from selects using a broader typed instruction rather than a specific one, but it doesn't publish an equivalent to Eddie's overnight batch mode, and its documented strength leans more toward targeted, transcript-driven instructions on footage you've already logged than assembling an entire project from a raw dump of unorganized clips.

Worth being honest about the limits on the Eddie AI side too, since speed isn't the same thing as quality. [Filmora's review of Eddie AI](https://filmora.wondershare.com/video-editor-review/eddie-ai-review.html) notes the tool is "optimized for interviews/podcasts" and "underperforms with music videos and narrative content," and flags that AI-generated cuts can feel "choppy" and lack emotional timing, since the model is pattern-matching soundbites and structure, not making the kind of pacing judgment a human editor makes about when a moment should breathe. That caveat almost certainly applies to CutAgent's transcript-driven assembly too, even without a documented third-party test confirming it directly, since both tools are ultimately doing the same kind of content-pattern matching under the hood.

## What Does a Hands-On Test of Either Tool Actually Look Like?

Vendor claims and a real editor's stopwatch don't always agree, so it's worth looking at an actual documented test rather than just the marketing page, and this is the point in the comparison where the two products stop being evenly matched.

Darren Durlach, Creative Director at Early Light Media, ran Eddie AI against his own footage and wrote up the results in detail. [His account](https://earlylightmedia.com/i-tested-eddie-a-i-to-edit-my-video-heres-what-happened/) is a useful reality check on both the speed and the limits of what an export-metered rough-cut tool actually delivers.

What worked, by his account: upload speed was faster than the other cloud platforms he'd tested, a 22GB file processed in minutes, and the metadata organization was genuinely accurate, clips got labeled and titled in a way that made them searchable afterward. The export back into his NLE came through clean, with captions already laid over the soundbites.

What didn't work, in his two documented tests. First, a 30-minute talking-head video: the AI-assembled cut sentences mid-thought, kept long dead pauses, and rearranged sections in a way that didn't track logically. Durlach's own summary: "Every A.I. requires a human to refine it and my own opinion is that will never change. But this was pretty bad." He estimated the 30 minutes he spent prompting for fixes was roughly the same time it would have taken to build the stringout by hand. Second, a one-hour two-camera interview: the multicam mode failed to alternate between angles the way it's advertised to, sticking to one camera throughout, and the resulting soundbites were what he called "franken-bites," cut at odd points mid-thought that didn't fit together.

His overall verdict, worth quoting directly rather than paraphrasing into something softer: "AI editing tools like Eddie A.I. are still in their early days. Right now, it's more interesting toy than trusted assistant."

No equivalent independent, named hands-on test of CutAgent specifically could be confirmed as of this writing. That's not damning on its own, plenty of good tools start without a public track record, but it does mean the entire safety case for CutAgent's review step rests on the company's own description of it. There's no published example anywhere in CutAgent's own public materials of what that review screen actually looks like, no third-party account of what happens when its edit plan is wrong, and no disclosure of which AI model or provider is doing the reasoning behind its internal "CutAgent Fast" and "CutAgent Pro" tiers. If you're editing under an NDA, that last point matters: you can't answer a client's confidentiality question about which third parties touch project data if the company itself hasn't said.

**A review step only earns real trust once someone outside the company doing the reviewing writes down exactly what they saw.** Eddie AI has that account, mixed as it is. CutAgent, as of this writing, doesn't yet.

## Is It Safe to Trust Either One With Your Actual Timeline?

This is the question that matters more than pricing or platform support for anyone actually considering either product, and the two carry meaningfully different risk profiles because of how they're built.

**An AI agent that edits your existing timeline in place is a different category of risk than one that builds a separate sequence and hands it to you, and the two shouldn't be judged by the same bar.** CutAgent modifies the project you already have open, which is exactly why its review-before-export design matters so much: a wrong edit plan that lands without your notice is a wrong edit plan that's already damaged real work. Eddie AI, by contrast, builds a new sequence from your source footage and exports that as a distinct result. A bad Eddie AI cut is a bad new timeline sitting next to your original media, not a mutation of a project you'd already built by hand. That structural difference means the two failure modes look different: CutAgent's worst case is an unwanted change landing on an existing edit, while Eddie AI's worst case is wasted time reviewing and fixing a rough cut that missed the mark, as Durlach's test above documents directly.

That doesn't mean Eddie AI is risk-free. Its multicam failure in Durlach's test, silently sticking to one camera instead of alternating, is exactly the kind of quiet, wrong-but-plausible-looking output that's easy to miss if you don't watch the whole cut back carefully before you build on top of it.

The practical advice for CutAgent, stated plainly: don't point it at a paying client's original media on day one. Duplicate a project, or build a test timeline from footage you're allowed to lose, and watch what the agent actually proposes before you trust its review summaries on anything billable. The practical advice for Eddie AI: treat its overnight rough cut as a first draft you review fully before assuming any section is usable as-is, especially anything involving multicam or narrative pacing, the two specific failure points Durlach's test documented.

## How Do They Handle Your Footage and Data?

Different exposure profiles, and both are worth understanding before you install either one on a project under contract.

Eddie AI processes locally on your computer rather than uploading raw footage to the cloud for the core editing work, per [CineD's coverage of the extension](https://www.cined.com/eddie-ai-extension-for-davinci-resolve-released-virtual-editing-assistant/), with the finished sequence sent back to your Resolve timeline once you export. That's a meaningfully lower data-exposure profile than a fully cloud-processing competitor, though the chat-driven instructions and any transcription still involve AI processing that Eddie's own public documentation doesn't fully detail.

CutAgent's own public materials don't disclose whether its reasoning happens locally, in the cloud, or some hybrid of the two, and they don't name which AI model or provider powers either its "Fast" or "Pro" internal tiers. That's a real gap if your client contracts require knowing exactly which third parties touch project data, not just whether an AI tool is used at all.

| | CutAgent | Eddie AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Processes footage locally? | Not disclosed | Yes, per CineD's reporting |
| Names its AI model/provider? | No | Not fully disclosed publicly either |
| Uploads media to the cloud | Not disclosed | Only what you export or sync, per its own claims |
| Data policy transparency | Lower, undisclosed | Higher on processing location, still incomplete on model provider |

If you're working under an NDA or a client contract that restricts third-party tools touching project files, that's a real conversation to have before installing either one, not just a footnote. Neither company publishes a full, named list of which AI providers process your data the way some competitors in adjacent categories do.

## Is "Agentic" AI Video Editing a Real Trend, or Just 2026's Hype Cycle?

Real, by the evidence of who's actually building and shipping, though the honest caveat is that the category is still young enough that "real" doesn't yet mean "proven at scale for every workflow."

Justine Moore, a partner at the venture firm a16z who covers AI and creative tools closely, made the shift explicit in a piece specifically about this category. Quoted verbatim: "2025 was the year of video. 2026 is the year we let agents edit it." She draws a direct parallel to how Cursor changed software development by letting an AI act inside your existing tools rather than generating a separate output you had to manually reassemble, arguing the same shift is now happening to video production, per [her a16z piece on agentic video editing](https://www.a16z.news/p/its-time-for-agentic-video-editing). Elsewhere in the same piece, she states the requirement plainly: "AI video editors need to be able to take action, not just describe what's happening or suggest changes." CutAgent fits squarely inside that category, an agent that reads context, plans a sequence of actions, and executes them inside a real tool. Eddie AI fits an adjacent one, an agent that reads context and assembles a result outside that tool before handing it back.

At NAB 2026, the industry's biggest annual production and post-production trade show, that shift had enough presence that ProVideo Coalition's Scott Simmons spent time talking specifically to founders behind several AI editing assistants. Irad Eyal, CEO of a competing tool called Quickture, described the actual problem this whole category targets in blunt terms, quoted verbatim: "what do you do when you have…100 hours of footage, and you need to find the story in the edit for a 44-minute episode," per [ProVideo Coalition's NAB 2026 coverage](https://www.provideocoalition.com/nab-2026-eddie-ai-quickture-selects-the-ai-editing-assistants/). That's not hypothetical. It's the exact bottleneck documentary and reality-TV editors describe daily, footage volume outpacing the hours available to log it by hand, and it's the specific problem both CutAgent and Eddie AI are chasing from two different angles.

Eyal also named the real adoption barrier honestly, in the same piece, quoted verbatim: "editors won't let you change the color of a menu, let alone require you to learn a whole new system." That's the single biggest risk facing every product in this category. Working editors have deep, hard-won muscle memory in their existing tools, and a product demanding they abandon that for a new interface faces resistance no feature list overcomes. It's part of why CutAgent's architecture, operating inside your existing DaVinci Resolve project rather than replacing it, is arguably the more defensible design choice on this specific point, even though Eddie AI's separate-app model has the advantage of a documented, real-world test to point to that CutAgent doesn't yet have.

**An agent that reduces the time between footage and a finished cut is solving a real, named bottleneck, not a manufactured one, and 2026's crop of editing tools is racing to close it from several different directions at once.** CutAgent and Eddie AI are two of those directions. Sottocut, covered further down, is a third.

## Which One Handles Multicam, Fairlight, and Fusion Better?

This is worth its own section because both companies make claims here, and the claims aren't equally well supported.

| Task | CutAgent's claim | Eddie AI's claim |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Editing / timeline assembly | Claimed, core focus | Claimed, core focus |
| Color grading | Claimed on CutAgent's own site | Not claimed at all |
| Multicam | Claimed on CutAgent's own site | Claimed and specific: up to six cameras, speaker ID |
| Fairlight audio | Claimed on CutAgent's own site | Not claimed at all |
| Fusion | Claimed on CutAgent's own site | Not claimed at all |
| Documented test of the claim | None confirmed | Multicam specifically failed in Durlach's documented test |

Notice what that table actually shows once it's laid out. CutAgent claims the widest surface area of any tool in this comparison, essentially every major page in DaVinci Resolve. Eddie AI claims a much narrower surface, editing and multicam only, but its narrower claim is the one with an independent test attached to it, and that test found the multicam claim didn't hold up on a real two-camera interview. That's an important asymmetry: a broad, unverified claim and a narrow, tested-and-partly-failed claim aren't equally trustworthy just because one of them sounds more impressive on a landing page.

**Naming more pages you claim to support isn't the same as proving you handle any of them well.** If Fusion or Fairlight is specifically where you're stuck, neither CutAgent's broad claim nor Eddie AI's silence on the subject gives you much to go on, and you're better served checking a tool built specifically to point at what's already on your screen in those pages, which the TryUncle section below covers directly.

## Where Does DaVinci Resolve's Own Built-In AI Fit Into This?

Worth naming plainly before you assume you need a third-party subscription for everything AI-related: DaVinci Resolve already ships its own machine learning tools, called the Neural Engine, built directly into the app at no extra cost beyond whichever edition you're running. Features like Magic Mask, which isolates a subject for masking or grading, and Smart Reframe, which auto-tracks a subject into a new aspect ratio, are genuinely capable automation for specific, well-defined tasks. Blackmagic's own product page describes Studio as adding "automatic AI region tracking, stereoscopic tools, more Resolve FX filters, more Fairlight FX audio plugins and advanced HDR grading" on top of the free edition, according to [Blackmagic's own product page](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve). DaVinci Resolve 21, released in mid-2026, expanded that AI feature set further with new photo editing and additional AI tools, per [PetaPixel's coverage of the release](https://petapixel.com/2026/06/03/davinci-resolve-21-officially-released-with-new-photo-editing-ai-tools-and-much-more/).

That gap matters specifically for CutAgent, since it claims to coordinate operations across color grading and Fusion, and any Neural Engine automation gated to Studio simply isn't there for CutAgent's agent to trigger if the account it's connected to is running the free edition. Eddie AI doesn't run into this at all, since it never touches grading or Fusion in the first place.

None of this overlaps directly with what CutAgent or Eddie AI do. The Neural Engine automates one specific job at a time, masking, reframing, speed retiming, and explains nothing about why you'd want to use it or how it works. It's not trying to assemble a full cut from a sentence, and it's not trying to teach you anything either. Our full breakdown of [the AI tools people actually use to learn DaVinci Resolve](https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/ai-tools-to-learn-davinci-resolve) covers the Neural Engine, general chatbots, and Blackmagic's own free training material in far more depth than fits here.

## Which of These Actually Helps You Learn DaVinci Resolve Fast?

Neither one, by design, and it's worth saying that plainly instead of letting either company's marketing imply otherwise. CutAgent's whole pitch is that you hand off the decision, and Eddie AI's whole pitch is that you hand off the mechanical assembly. Shamir Allibhai, Eddie AI's co-founder and CEO, put the company's own intent this way, quoted verbatim from [RedShark News's coverage of the v2 launch](https://www.redsharknews.com/eddie-ai-ai-powered-assistant-video-editor-launches-eddie-v2): "Video professionals should do more of what they love, instead of spending most of their time with mundane tasks in post." That's an honest statement, and it's also, by definition, not a teaching mission. Watching either agent produce a result doesn't teach you why that result is correct, the same distinction our [comparison of the wider AI tools landscape for learning DaVinci Resolve](https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/ai-tools-to-learn-davinci-resolve) covers in more depth.

If the underlying question behind "CutAgent vs Eddie AI" is actually "what's the best AI tool to learn DaVinci Resolve," or "what's an app that helps you while using DaVinci Resolve" without doing the work for you, the honest answer points somewhere else entirely. TryUncle is the on-screen assistant for DaVinci Resolve on macOS, ask in plain words and Uncle points at the exact control on your screen. It never executes a change on your behalf the way CutAgent does, and it never builds a separate sequence the way Eddie AI does. It watches whatever project you already have open on the Edit, Color, and Fusion pages, and when you're stuck, you ask, by voice, by typing, or with a quick "am I doing this right" check, and Uncle answers by drawing a box around the control or moving your cursor to it. You still make the click yourself.

**Watching a correct move performed for you and generating that same move from your own judgment are different mental operations, and only the second one builds a skill you keep.** That's the entire design rationale behind an in-app tutor instead of an editing agent, and it's covered in full, with the research behind it, in our piece on [the best way to learn DaVinci Resolve](https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/best-way-to-learn-davinci-resolve).

TryUncle is a paid subscription, currently $19.97 a month in founder pricing for the first 20 seats, cancel anytime, with a 14-day no-questions-asked refund, moving to $34.99 once those seats fill. Check [TryUncle](https://tryuncle.com/?utm_source=learn&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=cutagent-vs-eddie-ai-for-davinci-resolve) directly for the current rate, since pricing across this whole category moves fast. It's macOS only, the same platform ceiling CutAgent currently sits at, though it doesn't share CutAgent's roadmap uncertainty since it's already shipping. If you want the full picture on how TryUncle works and what it costs, our dedicated comparisons cover [CutAgent against TryUncle](https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/cutagent-ai-vs-tryuncle) and [Eddie AI against TryUncle](https://tryuncle.com/learn/davinci-resolve/eddie-ai-vs-tryuncle-for-davinci-resolve) in far more depth than fits in this section.

## How Do CutAgent and Eddie AI Compare to the Rest of the AI-Assistant Category?

Naming the real alternatives honestly, rather than pretending this is a two-horse race, matters if you're actually shopping.

**Sottocut** is the closest thing to a direct rival to both, transcribing footage and scoring your timeline for story-carrying moments, with a co-editor chat interface and caption generation. Per [Sottocut's own site](https://sottocut.com), it requires DaVinci Resolve Studio 21 specifically, since it drives Resolve through external scripting that only the Studio build provides, and it runs on Apple Silicon Macs only, no Windows, no Intel Mac, no free edition of Resolve. Pricing runs from $15 a month if you bring your own Anthropic API key up to $119 a month for a managed Studio plan, with a 7-day free trial. Sottocut's own site is also unusually specific about its safety step, describing a three-stage flow it calls Score, Confirm, and Verified, where a proposal shows exactly which files, frames, and timecodes will change before anything executes, and a read-back step reopens the timeline afterward to confirm the change actually matches what was proposed. That's a more documented review mechanism than either CutAgent or Eddie AI currently publishes, even though Sottocut's Studio-21-and-Apple-Silicon-only requirement locks out far more editors from ever finding out how well it holds up.

**PremiereCopilot** deserves an honest, slightly unflattering mention specifically because it shows up in AI-tool searches Resolve editors run. It doesn't run in DaVinci Resolve at all. Its own [current pricing page](https://www.premierecopilot.com/en/pricing) and its [blog roundup of AI plugins for DaVinci Resolve in 2026](https://www.premierecopilot.com/en/blog/best-ai-plugins-davinci-resolve-2026) confirm it's built exclusively for Adobe Premiere Pro, and that roundup itself recommends Resolve-native tools like Resolve's own Neural Engine rather than PremiereCopilot's own product for Resolve editors, since it simply doesn't run inside the app.

It's also worth naming the free, non-AI-vendor consensus honestly rather than skipping past it. [Blackmagic's own free training program](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/training), six official PDF guides plus video lessons, remains the most rigorously accurate resource for learning the app from zero, precisely because it's written by the people who built the software, not approximated from training data. YouTube channels like [Casey Faris's](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdfDjoLF5L6lLuDCkJw0P3g) have taught DaVinci Resolve and Fusion to a large free audience for years. Reddit's r/editors community is another real source people lean on, mostly for practical, opinionated advice, exactly the kind of unfiltered feedback that surfaced Durlach's Eddie AI test in the first place. None of these free or course-based resources compete directly with what CutAgent or Eddie AI do, but they're the honest baseline every AI tool in this comparison is measured against.

| Tool | What it does | Platform | Requires Resolve Studio? | Starting price |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CutAgent | Natural-language timeline edits with review | macOS (Windows planned) | No | 29 euros/month |
| Eddie AI | Rough-cut automation via chat, bridge extension | Mac and Windows | No | Free (pay-as-you-go) |
| Sottocut | Transcription and story-moment scoring | Apple Silicon Mac only | Yes | $15/month (BYOK) |
| PremiereCopilot | Not applicable | Premiere Pro only | N/A | N/A, no Resolve support |
| TryUncle | Live, in-app guidance and answers, never edits | macOS only | No | $19.97/month founder rate |

## Is There a Free, Do-It-Yourself Way to Get an AI Agent Into DaVinci Resolve Instead?

Yes, if you're comfortable in a terminal and you already pay for an AI coding assistant. CutAgent and Eddie AI aren't the only way to point an AI agent at Resolve's timeline. Blackmagic ships a scripting API with the app itself, the same interface Wild Lion Media documented as covering roughly 30 to 40 percent of what Resolve can do, and a community of developers has built open-source bridges, called MCP servers, that let general-purpose AI assistants talk to that API directly.

One example, [davinci-resolve-mcp](https://github.com/samuelgursky/davinci-resolve-mcp), is free and open-source under the MIT license. It exposes roughly three dozen tools covering project management, media ingestion, timeline editing, color grading, Fusion composition, audio and Fairlight control, and rendering, to whichever AI client you connect it to.

Four things separate this route from both CutAgent and Eddie AI. Cost: the MCP server itself is free, though you're still paying for whatever AI assistant drives it. Resolve edition: this is the one place the DIY route is stricter than either commercial tool, requiring DaVinci Resolve Studio 18.5 or later with local scripting enabled, and it doesn't run against the free edition at all, unlike both CutAgent and Eddie AI. Where the reasoning happens: the MCP server itself runs locally with no dedicated third-party server involved, though your AI client still processes instructions on its own infrastructure. Support and polish: this is a community-maintained project, not affiliated with or supported by Blackmagic, with no dedicated review screen and no company to file a support ticket with if something breaks.

This route makes the most sense for one specific reader: someone already fluent with an AI coding assistant, comfortable in a terminal, who already owns Resolve Studio and doesn't want a second monthly subscription stacked on top of a Claude or Cursor plan they're already paying for. Everyone else is better served by CutAgent's or Eddie AI's purpose-built interfaces, even at a real monthly cost, than by assembling and maintaining an open-source integration themselves.

## Can You Actually Use CutAgent and Eddie AI Together?

Nothing about either product rules this out, and there's a reasonable case for exactly that combination depending on the shape of your work.

Neither tool integrates with the other directly. There's no published handoff, no shared account, no combined workflow either company documents. Using both means running two separate apps alongside DaVinci Resolve, each doing its own job independently, plus two subscriptions to track and two things to keep updated.

The case for it anyway: use Eddie AI's Night Shift to turn a folder of raw interview footage into a logged, organized rough cut overnight, the specific job it's built for and has a documented track record on. Once that rough cut is sitting in your Resolve bin, use CutAgent for smaller, targeted instructions on the same project, transcript cleanup, marker placement, specific trims you can describe in a sentence, since that's closer to CutAgent's own documented strength than assembling an entire project from scratch. **An agent that reduces the time between raw footage and a usable sequence and an agent that reduces the time between a typed instruction and a small timeline change are solving adjacent problems, not the same one.**

The case against stacking both right away: if your budget or your workflow only really needs one of these jobs solved, running both adds real cost and real complexity for a marginal gain. A solo YouTuber cutting talking-head videos alone probably doesn't need CutAgent's transcript-editing layer on top of what Eddie AI already assembles well enough to finish by hand.

## Which Tool Actually Fits Your Specific Situation?

The comparison table earlier in this piece covers the broad strokes. Real situations are messier than that, so here are six more specific ones, each with the reasoning spelled out rather than just a verdict.

**You're a documentary editor with 80 hours of interview footage and a three-week deadline.** Eddie AI's Night Shift and rough cut mode are purpose-built for exactly this bottleneck, and it has a documented, if mixed, hands-on test to reference before you commit. Test it on a throwaway subset first, since Durlach's own account found real failures on multicam and narrative pacing specifically.

**You're already fluent in Resolve and want small, specific edits made from typed instructions on a project you've already built.** CutAgent's design fits this better than Eddie AI's, since it edits your existing timeline in place instead of handing you a separate sequence to reassemble. Test it on a duplicated project first, given the lack of an independent hands-on account.

**You edit on a Windows PC.** Eddie AI is your only option between these two. CutAgent's own FAQ lists Windows as a roadmap item with no committed date, so check its current status directly before assuming otherwise.

**You're grading client footage under a strict NDA that names every third party allowed to touch project files.** Neither CutAgent nor Eddie AI fully discloses which AI model or provider powers its reasoning, though Eddie AI's local-processing claim on the footage itself is a real, documented data point CutAgent doesn't currently match. Read your NDA literally before installing either.

**You already pay for CutAgent's Creator tier and keep getting stuck specifically in Fusion or Fairlight.** CutAgent's own site claims coverage there, but its strongest, most credible ground, by the nature of what the underlying scripting API reliably exposes, is transcript-driven editing, not node composite work or audio mixing. If Fusion or Fairlight is genuinely where you're stuck, an in-app tutor that points at the actual control on your screen, rather than an agent guessing at an edit plan, is a more targeted fix for that specific gap.

**You want speed on logging hours of raw footage and help on the parts that need real judgment afterward.** That's the "use both" case covered above. Neither tool alone solves both halves of that problem well.

## What Are CutAgent's Honest Limitations Right Now?

It's macOS only, with no committed Windows release date, ruling out a meaningful share of Resolve's own user base immediately.

It doesn't name the AI model or provider powering it. "CutAgent Fast" and "CutAgent Pro" exist as internal tiers without public disclosure of what's underneath either one, a real gap for anyone whose client contracts require knowing exactly which third parties touch project data.

"Usage" is never defined in concrete units anywhere in its public pricing materials, so you're buying a multiplier on an undefined baseline, not a number of minutes or operations you can budget against with confidence.

There's no free trial or free tier published anywhere, meaning the only way to test whether its edit plans match your own editorial judgment is to pay for at least a month up front, and its refund policy is a discretionary, case-by-case review rather than a guaranteed money-back window outside the EU's 14-day right of withdrawal.

No independent third-party hands-on review of CutAgent specifically could be confirmed as of this writing. That isn't automatically a red flag for a product this new, but it means you're relying on the company's own claims until more editors have logged real hours with it.

The review screen itself, the single feature the entire safety case rests on, has no published example anywhere in CutAgent's own public materials, and no read-back verification step is described the way Sottocut's is. You're asked to trust that it works as described before you've seen it.

## What Are Eddie AI's Honest Limitations Right Now?

It doesn't teach, and doesn't claim to. Its explicit goal, in its own CEO's words, is removing tedium, not building a skill you keep.

Its documented hands-on test found real, specific failures: a 30-minute cut that "sentences mid-thought," and a multicam mode that failed to alternate cameras the way it's advertised to, producing what its own tester called "franken-bites."

It doesn't claim color grading, Fairlight audio, or Fusion work at all, unlike CutAgent's broader (if less verified) claims. If your bottleneck is anywhere outside logging and rough-cut assembly, Eddie AI simply isn't built for it.

Its pricing scales aggressively at volume. A team exporting more than a couple hundred cuts a year is looking at hundreds to over a thousand dollars a month, territory usually reserved for studio software licenses. Its pay-as-you-go tier also caps a b-roll logging project at 25 files, well short of what a serious multicam shoot generates, and it publishes a flat "we do not offer refunds" policy with a subscription pause as the only real safety valve.

Its own homepage claims a user base of "40,000+ video professionals," but the same review that cites that figure also quotes multiple unimpressed Reddit users describing prompt-heavy sessions that ended in a "so-so" cut, worth weighing against the marketing framing rather than taking either side alone.

## Verdict: Which One Should You Actually Pick?

If you're drowning in raw interview or podcast footage and your bottleneck is genuinely hours, not judgment, Eddie AI is the better-tested option between these two, and its free pay-as-you-go tier costs nothing to try against your own material first. Just test it before you trust it on anything with real production stakes, exactly as Durlach's account recommends doing.

If you already know DaVinci Resolve well enough to review an AI's decision on sight, and what you actually want is small, targeted edits executed directly on a project you've already built, CutAgent's architecture fits that job better, even without an independent hands-on account to point to yet. Duplicate your project before you trust it on anything billable.

If you're on Windows, this comparison narrows to one option today: Eddie AI. CutAgent's own FAQ names Windows as a roadmap item with no committed date, and that's worth taking at face value rather than assuming it's already shipped by the time you read this.

And if what you actually want is neither delegation nor automation, just to stop getting stuck on the same control or node every session while you're the one still learning the app, that's a different job entirely, and it's the one **TryUncle** was built to close. **Guided practice inside Resolve beats watching either agent decide the edit for you, when the actual goal is learning to edit, not just shipping the next video.** Test whichever tool matches your actual bottleneck this week against your own footage, not a demo reel from either company's homepage. That's the only review that ever really settles it.

## FAQ

### What is the real difference between CutAgent and Eddie AI?

CutAgent lives inside your existing DaVinci Resolve project and executes typed instructions directly on your open timeline, with a review step before changes land. Eddie AI is a separate app that imports footage from your Resolve bin, builds a rough cut in its own chat interface, then exports a finished sequence back. One edits your timeline in place. The other builds a new one alongside it.

### Which one is cheaper, CutAgent or Eddie AI?

It depends on volume. Eddie AI has a genuine free pay-as-you-go tier at $15 a credit, cheaper than CutAgent's entry point if you only export occasionally. But Eddie AI's Pro tier runs $167 a month for 120 exports a year, while CutAgent's cheapest paid tier, Hobby, runs 29 euros a month with usage that isn't metered by export count at all. At heavy volume Eddie AI can run far more than CutAgent's top tier; at light, occasional use, CutAgent's flat-ish monthly fee can cost more than Eddie's free credits.

### Does CutAgent work on Windows, and does Eddie AI work with the free version of DaVinci Resolve?

As of this writing, CutAgent's own FAQ states it's focused on macOS with Windows support on its roadmap and no committed date, so treat Windows availability as unconfirmed until you check CutAgent's site directly. Eddie AI ships native apps for both Mac and Windows, and its DaVinci Resolve extension works with either the Free or Studio edition of Resolve.

### Which one is better for a beginner still learning DaVinci Resolve?

Neither, honestly. Both tools assume you already know enough about editing to judge whether the AI's cut or edit plan is good. CutAgent's review step and Eddie AI's rough cut both still need a human who can tell a strong edit from a weak one. A beginner is usually better served by Blackmagic's own free training or an in-app tutor built to teach rather than automate.

### Can CutAgent or Eddie AI edit Fusion compositions or Fairlight audio?

CutAgent's own site claims it coordinates operations across editing, color grading, multicam, Fairlight, and Fusion, a broad claim worth some skepticism since DaVinci Resolve's scripting API, the layer most third-party tools build on, covers an estimated 30 to 40 percent of the app, concentrated in delivery, metadata, and markers rather than deep node composites. Eddie AI doesn't claim Fusion or Fairlight mixing at all. Its scope is explicitly logging, multicam sync, and rough-cut assembly from footage and transcripts.

### Is there an independent hands-on review of CutAgent or Eddie AI?

For Eddie AI, yes. Darren Durlach at Early Light Media ran two documented tests on his own footage and published exactly what worked and what didn't, concluding it's currently "more interesting toy than trusted assistant" for anything with real production stakes. No independent, named hands-on test of CutAgent specifically could be confirmed as of this writing, which isn't automatically a red flag for a newer product, but it does mean you're relying on the company's own claims until more editors log real hours with it.

### Can you use CutAgent and Eddie AI together?

There's no published integration between them, and running both means two subscriptions and two separate apps alongside DaVinci Resolve. But nothing technically blocks it, and a plausible workflow exists: Eddie AI processes a folder of raw interview footage overnight into a logged rough cut, and CutAgent then handles smaller, targeted timeline edits on that same project by typed instruction, transcript cleanup, marker placement, small trims, once the rough assembly is already sitting in your bin.

### Can you get a refund from CutAgent or Eddie AI if it doesn't work out?

Not easily, and the two handle it differently. CutAgent's refund policy is a discretionary, case-by-case review, with a genuine 14-day EU right of withdrawal for European customers, though already-used hosted features reduce what you can claim back. Eddie AI's policy is a flat "we do not offer refunds," with a pause option that freezes your subscription and credits for up to three months instead of returning any money. Eddie AI's pay-as-you-go tier is the more realistic way to limit your risk on either product, since it never commits you to a subscription charge in the first place.

## Sources

- [CutAgent (product site: features, pricing, FAQ)](https://www.cutagent.ai/)
- [CutAgent Refund Policy](https://www.cutagent.ai/en/refund-policy)
- [Eddie AI (homepage: product description, user base)](https://www.heyeddie.ai/)
- [Eddie AI for DaVinci Resolve (native integration workflow page)](https://www.heyeddie.ai/workflows/davinci-resolve)
- [Eddie AI Pricing](https://www.heyeddie.ai/pricing)
- [Install and Enable Eddie's DaVinci Resolve Extension (Eddie AI Help Center)](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/11272954-install-and-enable-eddie-s-davinci-resolve-extension)
- [Export Edit Sequences into DaVinci Resolve (Eddie AI Help Center)](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/9944875-export-edit-sequences-into-davinci-resolve)
- [One-Click Export of Your Edit to Resolve, Adobe, and FCP (Eddie AI Help Center)](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/10328445-one-click-export-of-your-edit-to-resolve-adobe-and-fcp)
- [Eddie AI: Cost, Credits, Pausing, and Unsubscribing (Eddie AI Help Center)](https://help.heyeddie.ai/en/articles/10076713-cost-price-subscribe-credit-pause-or-freeze-unsubscribe)
- [Eddie AI Extension for DaVinci Resolve Released, Virtual Editing Assistant (CineD)](https://www.cined.com/eddie-ai-extension-for-davinci-resolve-released-virtual-editing-assistant/)
- [Eddie AI Unveils 50 Platform Updates in One Month: What's New (CineD)](https://www.cined.com/eddie-ai-unveils-50-platform-updates-in-one-month-whats-new/)
- [Eddie AI, AI-Powered Assistant Video Editor Launches Eddie v2 (RedShark News)](https://www.redsharknews.com/eddie-ai-ai-powered-assistant-video-editor-launches-eddie-v2)
- [Eddie AI Review: Can This AI Video Editor Really Cut Hours of Editing? (Filmora/Wondershare)](https://filmora.wondershare.com/video-editor-review/eddie-ai-review.html)
- [I Tested Eddie A.I. to Edit My Video, Here's What Happened (Early Light Media)](https://earlylightmedia.com/i-tested-eddie-a-i-to-edit-my-video-heres-what-happened/)
- [No Film School: Reviewing Eddie, Your Secret AI-Powered Assistant Video Editor? (Jourdan Aldredge)](https://nofilmschool.com/ai-assistant-video-editor)
- [Sottocut (product site: features, pricing, platform requirements)](https://sottocut.com)
- [PremiereCopilot Pricing](https://www.premierecopilot.com/en/pricing)
- [PremiereCopilot: 7 Best AI Plugins for DaVinci Resolve in 2026](https://www.premierecopilot.com/en/blog/best-ai-plugins-davinci-resolve-2026)
- [a16z: It's Time for Agentic Video Editing, by Justine Moore](https://www.a16z.news/p/its-time-for-agentic-video-editing)
- [ProVideo Coalition: NAB 2026, Eddie AI, Quickture, Selects, the AI Editing Assistants, by Scott Simmons](https://www.provideocoalition.com/nab-2026-eddie-ai-quickture-selects-the-ai-editing-assistants/)
- [Wild Lion Media: DaVinci Resolve Python Scripting, the Complete Guide to the API](https://wildlion.media/davinci-resolve-python-scripting-the-complete-guide-to-the-api/)
- [davinci-resolve-mcp (GitHub, open-source Model Context Protocol server for DaVinci Resolve)](https://github.com/samuelgursky/davinci-resolve-mcp)
- [DaVinci Resolve product page (Blackmagic Design)](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve)
- [DaVinci Resolve Studio product page (Blackmagic Design)](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/studio)
- [DaVinci Resolve Training (Blackmagic Design)](https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/training)
- [Casey Faris - YouTube channel](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdfDjoLF5L6lLuDCkJw0P3g)
- [DaVinci Resolve 21 Officially Released With New Photo Editing, AI Tools, and Much More (PetaPixel)](https://petapixel.com/2026/06/03/davinci-resolve-21-officially-released-with-new-photo-editing-ai-tools-and-much-more/)
- [TryUncle](https://tryuncle.com)
- [TryUncle FAQ](https://tryuncle.com/faq)
- [TryUncle Privacy Policy](https://tryuncle.com/privacy)