Premiere Pro MCP Server

Review Dialogue Candidates

review_dialogue_candidates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Review dialogue candidates with surrounding words and silence padding, make explicit keep/reject decisions, and compute revision-bound source-time removal ranges that reject stale selections.

Instructions

Review revision-bound dialogue candidates with surrounding words, silence padding, explicit keep/reject decisions and unioned source-time removal duration. Recomputed review revisions reject stale selections. Local-only; no timeline mapping, transcription or mutation.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`segments`	Yes	Captured transcript segments; each source must have one consistent revision.
`filler_words`	No	Exact filler words or phrases to flag for whole-segment review.
`rejected_ids`	No	Explicitly rejected entry IDs. Unselected entries remain pending.
`selected_ids`	No	Explicitly approved entry IDs. Omit for an initial review; an empty array approves nothing.
`silence_ranges`	No	Supplied local silence evidence; every source must occur in segments.
`padding_seconds`	No	Speech retained at both edges of silence cuts; defaults to 0.1 seconds. Does not alter filler-word ranges.
`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.
`minimum_silence_seconds`	No	Minimum silence duration; defaults to 0.7.
`expected_review_revision`	No	Revision from the initial review; required when selecting or rejecting entries. A changed input requires a new review.

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.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.25.0Oct 24, 2026

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"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.24.0Oct 12, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / expected_cep_target

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "required": [
+        "sequence_id"
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "required": [
+        "source_item"
+      ]
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Optional reviewed CEP sequence/clip identity and exact tick ranges. Checked before every generated command; UXP refuses this CEP-only guard.",
+  "properties": {
+    "backend": {
+      "const": "cep",
+      "description": "Backend namespace for these IDs.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "clip": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Optional exact reviewed timeline clip.",
+      "properties": {
+        "effect": {
+          "additionalProperties": false,
+          "description": "Reviewed effect and parameter identity checked before mutation.",
+          "properties": {
+            "display_name": {
+              "description": "Optional exact host display name.",
+              "maxLength": 512,
+              "minLength": 1,
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "match_name": {
+              "description": "Effect match name from host inspection.",
+              "maxLength": 512,
+              "minLength": 1,
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "parameter_index": {
+              "description": "Inspected zero-based parameter index.",
+              "maximum": 255,
+              "minimum": 0,
+              "type": "integer"
+            },
+            "parameter_name": {
+              "description": "Exact inspected parameter name.",
+              "maxLength": 512,
+              "minLength": 1,
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          },
+          "required": [
+            "match_name",
+            "parameter_index",
+            "parameter_name"
+          ],
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "end_ticks": {
+          "description": "Exact expected exclusive timeline end ticks.",
+          "pattern": "^-?\\d{1,30}$",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "in_ticks": {
+          "description": "Exact expected source In ticks.",
+          "pattern": "^-?\\d{1,30}$",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "node_id": {
+          "description": "Stable CEP node ID.",
+          "maxLength": 512,
+          "minLength": 1,
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "out_ticks": {
+          "description": "Exact expected exclusive source Out ticks.",
+          "pattern": "^-?\\d{1,30}$",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "project_item_id": {
+          "description": "Expected source project-item node ID.",
+          "maxLength": 512,
+          "minLength": 1,
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "start_ticks": {
+          "description": "Exact expected timeline start ticks.",
+          "pattern": "^-?\\d{1,30}$",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "track_index": {
+          "description": "Expected zero-based track index; identity still checked.",
+          "maximum": 255,
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "track_type": {
+          "description": "Expected media track group.",
+          "enum": [
+            "video",
+            "audio"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "node_id",
+        "track_type",
+        "track_index"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "project_document_id": {
+      "description": "Exact Premiere project document ID observed during review.",
+      "maxLength": 512,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sequence_id": {
+      "description": "Stable expected active sequence ID.",
+      "maxLength": 512,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source_item": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Reviewed source identity for a source-only operation.",
+      "properties": {
+        "media_path": {
+          "description": "Optional exact source-media path.",
+          "maxLength": 4096,
+          "minLength": 1,
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "node_id": {
+          "description": "Exact project-item node ID.",
+          "maxLength": 512,
+          "minLength": 1,
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "node_id"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "backend"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / expected_project_path

Added value: +{
+  "description": "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.",
+  "maxLength": 4096,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / receipt

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Versioned common mutation receipt; success never implies rendered verification.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv1.19.1Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, local behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that: revision-bound review, stale-selection invalidation, unioned source-time removal duration, and explicit exclusions of timeline mapping, transcription, and mutation. It does not describe error behavior beyond stale revisions, keeping it below the top score.

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 description is compact and front-loaded, beginning with the core action and then adding revision and scope constraints. Every sentence contributes distinct information with no filler.

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 the complex nested schema and existing output schema, the description covers the key review semantics, stale-revision behavior, and local-only boundaries. It leaves parameter-level details to the schema, which is appropriate, though the workflow context for a first review versus subsequent decisions could be clearer.

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 parameters are already well documented. The description adds conceptual context for keep/reject decisions and silence padding, but it does not explain specific parameter interactions or names beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: reviewing revision-bound dialogue candidates, including keep/reject decisions and silence handling. It is distinguishable from generic analysis tools, but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as analyze_dialogue_edit_candidates or plan_filler_word_removal.

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 implied through phrases like "explicit keep/reject decisions" and "recomputed review revisions reject stale selections," and the local-only scope is stated. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over related dialogue-analysis or removal-planning siblings.

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

Deploy Server