Splits clips across all tracks at the current playhead position in Adobe Premiere Pro, enabling quick cuts on every timeline layer without editing each track individually.
Premiere Pro expanded operation: razor all tracks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any side effects, prerequisites, or effects on the timeline. The user has no idea what 'razoring' entails (e.g., splitting clips at playhead, affecting all tracks).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise (one short phrase), but it is so brief that it omits necessary details. It does not waste words, but it also does not provide meaningful content, striking a neutral balance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no parameters, no output schema, and a description that merely restates the name, the tool's functionality, usage context, and behavior are entirely unspecified. It is not complete enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has no parameters, so the empty schema is fully covered. However, the description adds no information about any arguments (though none exist), so it neither helps nor hurts. Baseline score is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'razor all tracks' essentially repeats the tool name without explaining what 'razor' means in the Premiere Pro context or what specific action is performed. It barely distinguishes from sibling tools that also operate on tracks.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus other track-related operations (e.g., split_clip, ripple_delete). No context or alternative tools are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.