Summarize the current Premiere Pro timeline to review clips, edits, and sequence structure, helping AI agents understand project state before editing or exporting.
Premiere Pro expanded operation: get timeline summary.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.0-ibintec.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only says 'expanded operation' without explaining side effects, return contents, or operational constraints. This is completely opaque for a tool that could summarize the timeline.
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 short but not meaningfully concise—'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is filler that wastes space. The actual content merely restates the tool name, providing no additional structure or value.
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?
Given the vast sibling toolset, this description is severely under-specified. There is no output schema, no behavioral details, and no differentiation from many other timeline-related tools, leaving the agent unable to correctly invoke or interpret results.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed; the baseline of 4 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 repeats the tool name ('get timeline summary') with a vague qualifier ('Premiere Pro expanded operation') that adds no concrete meaning. It fails to explain what a timeline summary contains or how it differs from similar tools like get_sequence_structure or get_timeline_gaps.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based solely on the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.