Update text, colors, or other editable Motion Graphics properties in Premiere Pro by providing track index, clip index, property name, and value.
Set an editable property on a Motion Graphics clip (text, colors, etc.)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| value | Yes | Property value (string for text, number for numeric, etc.) | |
| clipIndex | Yes | Clip index | |
| trackIndex | Yes | Video track index | |
| propertyName | Yes | Property name |
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 burden. It does not disclose whether the change is undoable, whether read-only/keyframed properties will fail, what permissions or prerequisites are needed, or what happens when an invalid propertyName is passed.
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 short sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource. It is arguably too terse for a 4-required-parameter mutation, but nothing is padded.
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?
For a mutation tool with zero annotations and no output schema, the description omits prerequisites, the discovery path for property names, failure modes, and return behavior. An agent could not confidently call this without consulting get_mogrt_properties independently.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters and the value type coercion. The description only adds that properties can be text or colors; it does not explain propertyName formatting or index conventions beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific verb (set) and resource (an editable property on a Motion Graphics clip), with a parenthetical that scopes the kinds of values involved. It is distinguishable from get_mogrt_properties and set_effect_property, though no sibling is named explicitly.
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 on when to use this versus get_mogrt_properties or set_effect_property, and no note that property names must first be discovered (e.g., via get_mogrt_properties) or that the clip must already be a MOGRT instance on the timeline.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.