Premiere Pro MCP Server

Encode File

encode_file

Sends an external file to Adobe Media Encoder for encoding with a specified preset and optional time range. Returns a job ID that must be verified independently.

Instructions

Request an Adobe Media Encoder encode for an external file. The returned job ID is an unverified handoff; verify queue presence or the output file independently.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`in_seconds`	No	Optional start time in seconds
`input_path`	Yes	Full path to the input file
`out_seconds`	No	Optional end time in seconds
`output_path`	Yes	Full output file path
`preset_path`	Yes	Path to an AME preset file (.epr)
`remove_on_completion`	No	Remove from queue on completion (default: true)

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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is not read-only, not idempotent, not open-world, and not destructive. The description adds an important behavioral caveat beyond that: the returned job ID is an 'unverified handoff' and queue presence or the output file must be verified independently.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the critical verification caveat. Every sentence carries useful information and there is no filler.

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 a full schema, annotations covering safety traits, and an output schema, the description only needs to establish purpose and any non-obvious behavior. It does that well by warning that the job ID is an unverified handoff, though it could say more about when to choose this over related encoding siblings.

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 all six parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add syntax, constraints, or workflow meaning for parameters like preset_path, in_seconds, or remove_on_completion, so it meets the baseline rather than exceeding it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Request an Adobe Media Encoder encode for an external file.' The 'external file' scope helps distinguish it from sibling tools like encode_project_item, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or clarify batch-vs-single-file boundaries.

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?

It implies usage for an external file and adds a post-invocation verification step, but it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings such as encode_project_item or start_batch_encode. An agent must infer routing from the tool name alone.

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

Deploy Server