Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Premiere Pro

MCP Premiere Pro

by Miinwan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

toggle_track_visibility

Shows or hides a video track’s output in a specified Premiere Pro sequence by toggling its eye icon, including sequences that are not currently active.

Instructions

Shows or hides a video track by toggling its output (the eye icon) in the specified sequence. The sequence does not have to be the active one. This is track OUTPUT, not track targeting -- use set_target_track for the V1/A1 patch buttons.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sequenceId": "<sequenceId>",
      "trackIndex": "<trackIndex>",
      "visible": "<visible>"
    },
    "name": "toggle_track_visibility"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
visibleYesWhether to show (true) or hide (false)
sequenceIdYesThe sequence ID (GUID) as returned in the "id" field by list_sequences or get_active_sequence
trackIndexYesThe index of the video track

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds useful detail: the operation works on non-active sequences, it affects the eye-icon output, and it is explicitly not track targeting. It does not describe failure behavior, but the core behavioral traits are stated clearly.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the important distinctions are placed immediately after the core definition. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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?

For a simple three-parameter tool with fully documented schema fields and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers what the tool does, the non-active-sequence caveat, and the critical alternative tool. An agent should be able to call this tool correctly without further context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents all three parameters, but the description adds value by clarifying that 'visible' refers to the eye-icon output, that sequenceId can be a non-active sequence, and that this is output visibility rather than V1/A1 targeting. This helps the agent choose the correct parameter meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it shows or hides a video track's output in a specified sequence. It also explicitly distinguishes this from set_target_track, which controls V1/A1 patch targeting, so an agent can differentiate the tools without inspecting schemas.

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 explains when to use the tool and even when not to: the sequence need not be active, and this is specifically track output rather than track targeting. It names the sibling tool set_target_track as the correct alternative for patch buttons, which is clear routing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools