Premiere Pro MCP Server

Set Effect Property

set_effect_property

Set effect property values on a Premiere Pro clip, accepting scalars, booleans, strings, or vectors like Position, and verify readback per component.

Instructions

Set the value of a specific effect property on a clip. Accepts scalar, boolean, string, and array-shaped vector values (for example Motion > Position as [x, y]) and verifies the readback component by component.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`value`	Yes	Value to set. Use a number for scalar properties, an array of numbers for vector properties such as Motion > Position or Anchor Point ([x, y]), a boolean for checkbox properties, or the exact JSON string reported for a MOGRT text or graphic parameter.
`node_id`	Yes	Node ID of the clip
`effect_name`	Yes	Display name of the effect (e.g., 'Motion', 'Opacity')
`property_name`	Yes	Display name of the property (e.g., 'Scale', 'Position', 'Opacity')

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully.
`data`	No	Tool-specific result data when ok is true.
`tool`	Yes	The registered MCP tool name.
`error`	No	Failure detail when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv1.14.9Sep 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / value / description

Previous value: -"Number or string value to set. Use the exact JSON string reported for a MOGRT text or graphic parameter."New value: +"Value to set. Use a number for scalar properties, an array of numbers for vector properties such as Motion > Position or Anchor Point ([x, y]), a boolean for checkbox properties, or the exact JSON string reported for a MOGRT text or graphic parameter."

addedInput schema / properties / value / items
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / value / maxItems
```
Added value: +4
```
addedInput schema / properties / value / maxLength
```
Added value: +8192
```
addedInput schema / properties / value / minItems
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / value / type

Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "string",
+  "boolean",
+  "array"
+]

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.14.4Aug 29, 2026

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"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.13.0Aug 23, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / value / description

Previous value: -"Value to set"New value: +"Number or string value to set. Use the exact JSON string reported for a MOGRT text or graphic parameter."

removedInput schema / properties / value / type
```
Removed value: -"number"
```

Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0Jul 27, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedv1.1.1May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds a valuable behavioral detail: it 'verifies the readback component by component.' This goes beyond the schema and annotations by telling the agent that the tool actively confirms the value was applied, which matters for error handling and trust in the result.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause adds useful information about accepted values and verification behavior. There is no fluff or repetition of schema details, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 schema's full parameter coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers value shape flexibility and verification behavior. A minor gap is that it does not mention prerequisites such as the effect already existing on the clip or how failures are surfaced, but this does not seriously hinder correct invocation.

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 baseline applies. The description reinforces acceptable value types and gives an example, but the schema already documents the same semantics thoroughly, including the array shape and MOGRT string behavior. The description adds essentially no new parameter-level meaning 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 the operation: 'Set the value of a specific effect property on a clip,' which combines a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes well enough from get_effect_properties and apply_effect by focusing on setting an existing property, though it does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast itself with specialized setters.

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 description provides clear context: use this when you need to set an effect property value on a clip, with support for multiple value shapes. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the intended use is unambiguous and no exclusions are needed for basic usage.

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

Deploy Server