Premiere Pro MCP Server

Inspect Otio Interchange

inspect_otio_interchange

Read-onlyIdempotent

Parses a local OTIO Timeline.1 into exact-tick offline tracks, clips, gaps, and transitions, and reports missing media, opaque nests/effects, and unsupported timing before Premiere edits.

Instructions

Parse a bounded local OTIO Timeline.1 into exact-tick offline tracks/clips/gaps/transitions. Reports missing media, opaque nests/effects/metadata and unsupported timing. Synthetic IDs never authorize Premiere writes; this tool never imports a project.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Absolute caller-selected local file path. Referenced media is never opened automatically.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional client-chosen key (1-128 chars of A-Z a-z 0-9 . _ : -) for this intended edit. Pass a fresh key per edit and reuse it only when retrying that same edit, for example after a client-side timeout. A repeat with the same tool, key and arguments is not run again: while the first call is running it fails with IDEMPOTENCY_IN_PROGRESS (poll get_last_operations); after it finished it returns the original outcome marked replayed. A definite failure with nothing applied (receipt outcome not_applied) may be retried with the same key. Reusing a key with different arguments fails with IDEMPOTENCY_KEY_REUSED. Scoped to this MCP session (the stdio server process or one HTTP session) and held in memory only (200 keys, 1 hour); it does not survive a restart or reconnect. Read-only invocations are never deduplicated.
`expected_cep_target`	No	Optional reviewed CEP sequence/clip identity and exact tick ranges. Checked before every generated command; UXP refuses this CEP-only guard.
`expected_project_path`	No	Optional absolute saved-project path. Every generated CEP command refuses before its body when the active project differs or is unsaved. UXP commands refuse this CEP-only guard; local-only tools do not inspect Premiere. Omit to keep existing behavior.

Output 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.
`receipt`	No	Versioned common mutation receipt; success never implies rendered verification.
`idempotency`	No	Present when idempotency_key deduplicated this call: replayed is true when the original outcome was returned instead of running again.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.25.0Oct 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional client-chosen key (1-128 chars of A-Z a-z 0-9 . _ : -) for this intended edit. Pass a fresh key per edit and reuse it only when retrying that same edit, for example after a client-side timeout. A repeat with the same tool, key and arguments is not run again: while the first call is running it fails with IDEMPOTENCY_IN_PROGRESS (poll get_last_operations); after it finished it returns the original outcome marked replayed. A definite failure with nothing applied (receipt outcome not_applied) may be retried with the same key. Reusing a key with different arguments fails with IDEMPOTENCY_KEY_REUSED. Scoped to this MCP session (the stdio server process or one HTTP session) and held in memory only (200 keys, 1 hour); it does not survive a restart or reconnect. Read-only invocations are never deduplicated.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9._:-]+$",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / idempotency

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Present when idempotency_key deduplicated this call: replayed is true when the original outcome was returned instead of running again.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv1.24.0Oct 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description's added value is real: it discloses that the parse reports missing media, opaque nests/effects/metadata and unsupported timing, and that it never imports a project or opens referenced media. That's meaningful context beyond the structured hints, though pagination/output shape detail is absent.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core verb/resource and output structure, ending with the critical safety boundary ('never imports a project'). Minimal waste; slight jargon ('Timeline.1') costs a bit of immediacy.

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?

Given an output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, the description is nearly complete for a read-only inspection tool: it says what is parsed, what is reported, and what is never done. The one gap is explicit when-to-use routing against the many interchange 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%, with detailed nested descriptions for path, idempotency_key, and the CEP guard objects, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only loosely implies the 'bounded local' path constraint and adds no parameter-specific meaning (e.g., how expected_cep_target relates to an OTIO parse).

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 (Parse) and resource (a bounded local OTIO Timeline.1) and enumerates what it produces (tracks/clips/gaps/transitions in exact ticks). It distinguishes itself from CEP-mutating siblings by emphasizing offline/local parsing, though it never names a specific alternative tool like inspect_fcpxml_interchange or inspect_interchange_artifact.

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?

Usage is only implied through scoping language ('bounded local', 'never imports a project', synthetic IDs never authorize writes). There is no explicit 'use when you have an OTIO file to vet before import' guidance, nor a direct comparison to the many sibling interchange-inspection tools, leaving the agent to infer selection.

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

Deploy Server