Skip to main content
Glama
leancoderkavy

Premiere Pro MCP Server

by leancoderkavy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Remove Keyframe Range

remove_keyframe_range
Destructive

Delete all keyframes within a specified time range on an effect property and return the remaining keys. Refuses if no keyframes exist in that range.

Instructions

Remove every keyframe in a time range (inclusive) from an effect property and read the remaining keys back. Refuses, changing nothing, when the range holds no key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_idYesNode ID of the clip
effect_nameYesDisplay name of the effect
end_secondsYesEnd of the range, in seconds from the clip's start; must not be before start_seconds
property_nameYesDisplay name of the property
start_secondsYesStart of the range: seconds from the clip's start on the timeline (0 is the clip's first frame)

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.19.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / end_seconds / description
      Previous value: -"End of the range in seconds"New value: +"End of the range, in seconds from the clip's start; must not be before start_seconds"
    • changedInput schema / properties / start_seconds / description
      Previous value: -"Start of the range in seconds"New value: +"Start of the range: seconds from the clip's start on the timeline (0 is the clip's first frame)"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.18.6
    • 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."
  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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  5. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation risk is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the range is inclusive, the call reads remaining keys back, and an empty range is a no-op refusal that changes nothing — an important atomicity guarantee for an agent reasoning about partial failure.

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 tightly written sentences with zero filler: the action and scope come first, the failure/no-op condition second. Nothing can be cut without losing meaning.

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 annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema covering the returned keys, the description only needs to explain the mutation semantics — which it does, including the empty-range case. It could mention that other keyframes outside the range are untouched, but that is a minor omission for a 5-parameter, fully-documented tool.

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 five parameters are already documented in the schema. The description contributes only the word 'inclusive' for the boundary semantics, which is a real but small addition over start_seconds/end_seconds definitions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (remove), a precisely scoped resource (every keyframe in an inclusive time range on an effect property), and distinguishes itself from the single-key siblings remove_keyframe and add_keyframe. No ambiguity about what gets affected.

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?

The inclusive range and the empty-range refusal imply when the tool is appropriate, but it never names remove_keyframe (single key) or get_keyframes as the alternatives, nor states the conditions that select this bulk variant over them. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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