Skip to main content
Glama
leancoderkavy

Premiere Pro MCP Server

Inspect Sequence Av Settings

inspect_sequence_av_settings
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect the active sequence’s documented audio, tone-mapping, linear-compositing, bit-depth, render-quality, and display settings to troubleshoot Premiere Pro output.

Instructions

Inspect documented audio, tone-mapping, linear-compositing, bit-depth, render-quality, and display settings for the active sequence.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the tool completed successfully.
dataNoTool-specific result data when ok is true; on failure, diagnostic detail when the tool provides it.
toolYesThe registered MCP tool name.
errorNoFailure detail when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.18.6
    • 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."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.14.9
    • removedInput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.14.4
    • 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"
      +}
  4. Addedv1.4.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety and side-effect profile are covered by structured data. The description adds only the 'documented' qualifier and the category list; it does not disclose scope, whether a sequence must be active, or how partial support is reported, so it adds modest value over the annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb and object first and the covered setting categories trailing. No filler, no repetition of the title, and the enumeration is informative rather than padding.

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 need not be explained, and a zero-parameter read-only tool needs little more. The one real gap is differentiating from get_sequence_settings and similar inspection tools, which the description never addresses.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is required and that it targets the active sequence, so nothing is missing on the input side.

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?

States a specific verb (Inspect) and resource (audio/video settings of the active sequence), and enumerates the setting categories it covers (audio, tone-mapping, linear compositing, bit-depth, render-quality, display). It is clearly a read operation, but it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like get_sequence_settings, set_sequence_audio_settings, or inspect_project_item_av_metadata, leaving the agent to guess which 'settings' call to pick.

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: the read-only name and annotations suggest inspection of the currently active sequence, and the word 'documented' hints at a subset of settings. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion of returned settings, and no routing to the alternative get_sequence_settings tool that overlaps heavily.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools