Premiere Pro MCP Server

Create Subclip

create_subclip

Create a named subclip from a project item by setting in and out points in seconds, enabling precise reuse of selected segments in Premiere Pro timelines.

Instructions

Create a subclip from a project item with in/out points

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name for the subclip
`item_id`	Yes	Node ID or name of the source project item
`in_seconds`	Yes	In-point in seconds
`out_seconds`	Yes	Out-point in seconds

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully.
`data`	No	Tool-specific result data when ok is true.
`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 changedv1.14.4Aug 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

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and is not destructive; the description is consistent with that. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema, such as indicating the source is an existing project item, but no extra side effects, prerequisites, or return behavior are disclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the verb and object immediately and contains no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a simple create operation.

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?

With full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema present, the brief description is largely sufficient for a well-scoped create tool. It could add value by noting the relationship to create_subsequence or naming what object is returned, but nothing essential for invocation is missing.

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 description is not required to explain the parameters. The phrase 'with in/out points' loosely echoes in_seconds/out_seconds but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names the specific operation (Create), the object produced (a subclip), and the source/input (a project item with in/out points). It is easily distinguished from sibling creation tools like create_sequence or create_subsequence because it targets a subclip, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description is a definition rather than decision support, and it names no alternatives such as create_subsequence, so an agent must infer when this tool is the right choice.

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

Deploy Server