Premiere Pro MCP Server

Batch Add Transitions

batch_add_transitions

Adds one video transition to every eligible cut point on a track and reports per-cut readback, simplifying batch transition application.

Instructions

EXPERIMENTAL (undocumented QE DOM): Add the same video transition at each eligible cut point on a track and report per-cut readback.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`track_index`	No	Video track index (0-based, default: 0)
`transition_name`	Yes	Name of the transition (e.g., 'Cross Dissolve')
`duration_seconds`	No	Duration of each transition in seconds (default: 1.0)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully.
`data`	No	Tool-specific result data when ok is true; on failure, diagnostic detail when the tool provides it.
`tool`	Yes	The registered MCP tool name.
`error`	No	Failure detail when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.18.6Sep 30, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

changedOutput schema / properties / data / description

Previous value: -"Tool-specific result data when ok is true."New value: +"Tool-specific result data when ok is true; on failure, diagnostic detail when the tool provides it."

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.14.4Aug 29, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Tool-specific result data when ok is true."
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Failure detail when ok is false.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Whether the tool completed successfully.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "The registered MCP tool name.",
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "tool"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0Jul 27, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedv1.1.1May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by labeling the tool EXPERIMENTAL and noting it relies on undocumented QE DOM, plus it reports per-cut readback. It does not describe failure modes or reversibility, but it meaningfully enriches the behavioral picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that covers the experimental caveat, the action, the scope, and the readback behavior. Every clause earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation, and annotations cover safety hints. The description supplies the experimental QE DOM warning and the batch scope. It is nearly complete, though it could clarify what makes a cut point eligible or note failure handling for a mutation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: adding the same video transition at each eligible cut point on a track. It distinguishes this batch operation from single-transition siblings like add_transition and add_transition_to_clip. The scope is clear enough for an agent to identify the tool's function without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage through scope: batch-adding the same transition across eligible cuts on one track. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives such as add_transition, add_transition_to_clip, or batch_apply_effect. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided, so the guidance remains minimum viable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server