Enable or disable a specific video or audio clip on a Premiere Pro timeline by specifying track type, track index, clip index, and desired state.
Enable or disable a clip on the timeline
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| enabled | Yes | True to enable, false to disable | |
| clipIndex | Yes | Clip index | |
| trackType | Yes | Track type | |
| trackIndex | Yes | Track index |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Beyond implying a mutation, it does not explain side effects of disabling a clip, whether the change is reversible, permission requirements, error behavior for missing clips, or what the operation returns.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to the missing behavioral context rather than being a structural flaw in itself.
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?
This is a four-required-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description says almost nothing beyond the action. It does not describe side effects, state changes, or return behavior, leaving important context for an agent to infer.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains each parameter, including that enabled true means enable and false means disable. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 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 uses a specific verb pair ("Enable or disable") and resource ("a clip on the timeline"), so the basic action is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish this from nearby tools such as set_clip_mute or set_effect_enabled, but the clip-level enable/disable action is still recognizable.
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?
The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer its place among many clip/timeline sibling tools from the name and schema alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.