Skip to main content
Glama
leancoderkavy

Premiere Pro MCP Server

by leancoderkavy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Replace Clip Media

replace_clip_media

Replaces a timeline clip's media while preserving its trim, position, linked audio, and adjacent clips. Use it to swap source footage without rebuilding edits.

Instructions

Unavailable by design: the legacy ExtendScript overwrite route cannot prove that replacing media preserves the original clip's trim, position, linked audio, or adjacent clips, so this tool performs no mutation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
new_item_idYesNode ID or name of the new source project item
clip_node_idYesNode ID of the timeline clip to replace media on

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 changedv1.18.6
    • 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."
  2. 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"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  4. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description says the tool 'performs no mutation', which contradicts the annotation readOnlyHint=false. The annotation indicates the tool is not read-only, while the description claims it cannot mutate state at all. Although the description adds useful rationale about trim, position, linked audio, and adjacent clips, the contradiction with structured annotations is serious.

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?

The single sentence is front-loaded with the key status 'Unavailable by design' and follows immediately with the reason. There is no wasted text, and the most important information comes first.

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?

For a disabled no-op tool with a simple two-parameter schema and an output schema, the description gives enough context to know not to call it and why. It does not specify what actually happens on invocation (error vs. empty response), which is a minor remaining gap.

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 input schema already documents both clip_node_id and new_item_id. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline when schema coverage is high.

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 clearly identifies this as the media-replacement route and states that it is unavailable by design, with a specific reason. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings such as replace_clip or overwrite_clip, nor does it explicitly restate the intended operation beyond the title.

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 'Unavailable by design' gives a clear, absolute when-not-to-use signal, which is strong guidance. It stops short of naming an alternative replacement tool or workflow, so it is not fully complete on the alternatives axis.

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