Remove a specific marker from the active Premiere Pro sequence by its 0-based time-order index.
Remove a specific marker from the active sequence by index
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| markerIndex | Yes | Index of the marker to remove (0-based, in time order) |
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, yet it only says what is removed. It says nothing about irreversibility, permission requirements, index-shifting after removal, invalid-index behavior, or return values for what is inherently a destructive mutation.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The action, target, scope, and selector are stated immediately.
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 simple one-parameter tool whose parameter is fully documented by the schema, so the core call is clear. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves meaningful gaps around error behavior, reindexing, and confirmation of what was removed.
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 that markerIndex is 0-based and in time order. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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 states a specific verb (Remove), resource (marker), scope (active sequence), and selector (by index). It implicitly distinguishes itself from clear_all_markers and add_marker, but doesn't explicitly contrast with update_marker or clip-marker tools such as add_clip_marker.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives. The word 'specific' hints that it is not a clear-all operation, but the agent must infer that from sibling names rather than from the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.