Skip to main content
Glama
leancoderkavy

Premiere Pro MCP Server

Remove From Timeline

remove_from_timeline
Destructive

Delete unwanted clips from your timeline. Choose ripple delete to automatically close any gap left behind.

Instructions

Remove a clip from the timeline

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rippleNoWhether to ripple delete (close the gap). Default: false
node_idYesNode ID of the clip to remove

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the tool completed successfully.
dataNoTool-specific result data when ok is true.
toolYesThe registered MCP tool name.
errorNoFailure detail when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the word 'remove,' such as whether the source project item is preserved or how gaps are handled. It does not contradict the annotations, so a mid-range score is appropriate.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. It loses a point because it essentially restates the title rather than adding any distinguishing detail, but for a simple tool this brevity is still effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema, full parameter descriptions, and annotations covering destructiveness, the basic invocation context is present. However, the lack of differentiation from sibling removal/ripple tools leaves an agent with ambiguity about when this is the right tool, making the definition less than fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters: node_id and ripple are each clearly documented. The description itself does not add parameter-level meaning, but the schema already carries that burden, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 action and resource: 'Remove a clip from the timeline.' This is clear and unambiguous about the core operation. However, it does not differentiate from closely related siblings like ripple_delete or remove_selected_clips, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ripple_delete, lift_selection, extract_selection, or remove_selected_clips. The only usage hint is the ripple parameter in the schema, but the description itself provides no context about when to choose this tool.

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