Premiere Pro MCP Server

Export As Project

export_as_project

Export a Premiere Pro sequence as a standalone .prproj project file. Specify an output path and optionally a sequence ID to save the project for sharing or backup.

Instructions

Export a sequence as a standalone Premiere Pro project file

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`output_path`	Yes	Full path for the exported .prproj file
`sequence_id`	No	Sequence name or ID. Uses active sequence if omitted.

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

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide only negative hints (readOnly=false, destructive=false) and are not informative. The description adds that the operation creates a standalone .prproj file, which is useful behavioral context. It does not mention overwrite behavior, whether the current project is modified, or whether media is embedded/referenced, leaving some side-effect ambiguity.

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?

One tightly worded sentence contains the action, target, and output format with no filler or redundant framing. It is appropriately sized for a simple export 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?

The description, combined with 100% schema documentation and an output schema, covers the essential aspects of the operation. It lacks an explicit note about whether the output file overwrites an existing path or whether the current project remains untouched, but the 'standalone' wording partially covers the latter.

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 output_path and sequence_id, including the active-sequence fallback. The description adds no parameter detail beyond identifying the sequence as the thing being exported, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Export') with a clear resource ('a sequence') and a precise output ('standalone Premiere Pro project file'). This distinguishes it from sibling export tools like export_sequence (media output) and export_as_fcp_xml / export_aaf / export_omf (interchange formats).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'standalone Premiere Pro project file' gives a clear usage context: choose this tool when a sequence must become a .prproj rather than a media or interchange file. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top tier, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to route correctly.

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

Deploy Server