Switch Premiere Pro to a specific workspace layout by name, such as Editing, Color, Audio, Effects, or Graphics, so the interface matches your current editing task.
Switch to a specific workspace layout
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspaceName | Yes | Name of the workspace (e.g. 'Editing', 'Color', 'Audio', 'Effects', 'Graphics') |
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 behavioral disclosure burden. 'Switch' implies a state change, but it does not say whether the switch is immediate, persistent, reversible, or whether unsaved workspace changes are affected.
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 no filler. It says exactly what the tool does in very few words.
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 simple one-parameter tool with rich schema coverage, the core action is identified clearly enough to invoke it. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify the operational impact of switching workspaces; that gap keeps it at a minimum-viable level.
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 single workspaceName parameter has 100% schema description coverage, including example values. The description adds no constraints or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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?
Names a specific verb, 'switch', and a specific resource, 'workspace layout', so the action is clear. It does not explicitly call out that this is a Premiere Pro workspace or distinguish it from adjacent settings tools, but no sibling appears to overlap directly.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternative tools. Any usage must be inferred from the action name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.