Skip to main content
Glama
leancoderkavy

Premiere Pro MCP Server

by leancoderkavy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Wait Workflow Job

wait_workflow_job
Read-onlyIdempotent

Waits up to 60 seconds for an exact local or native workflow job, reports receipt progress, and flags uncorrelated terminal events for reconciliation without canceling accepted work.

Instructions

Wait up to 60 seconds for an exact native or local job. An uncorrelated native terminal event stops observation with requiresReconciliation, never verified completion. Optional MCP progress reports observed receipt progress. Stopping the wait never cancels accepted native work.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYesExact tracked job ID; missing receipts never imply completion.
originYesReceipt owner backend.
timeout_msNoBounded observation wait, default 10000 ms.
expected_cep_targetNoOptional reviewed CEP sequence/clip identity and exact tick ranges. Checked before every generated command; UXP refuses this CEP-only guard.
expected_project_pathNoOptional 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.

Output 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.
receiptNoVersioned common mutation receipt; success never implies rendered verification.
idempotencyNoPresent 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.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.25.0
    • 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"
+}
  2. Addedv1.24.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: it discloses the requiresReconciliation outcome for uncorrelated native terminal events, that such an event never constitutes verified completion, and that stopping the wait does not cancel accepted native work. These are non-obvious behavioral traits an agent cannot get from annotations or schema.

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?

Four tight sentences with the duration bound front-loaded and no filler. Some terms ('uncorrelated native terminal event', 'requiresReconciliation') are dense jargon that would benefit from one clarifying clause, but nothing is wasted.

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 an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, and the description covers the wait bounds and failure semantics well. It leaves the two optional CEP guard objects unexplained at a narrative level and does not define how 'native' vs 'local' origin jobs differ in outcome.

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 schema already documents job_id, origin, timeout_ms, and both guard objects. The description adds only the 60-second cap ('native or local' loosely mapping to the origin enum) and does not clarify how expected_cep_target/expected_project_path affect the wait, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Wait up to 60 seconds for an exact native or local job'), so the agent knows this is a bounded blocking wait rather than an inspection call. It does not name the obvious non-blocking sibling (inspect_workflow_job) or cancel_workflow_job, so differentiation must be inferred from the verb.

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 only implied — an agent can infer 'use this to block until a job reaches a terminal state' but the description never states when to choose this over inspect_workflow_job or cancel_workflow_job. The 60-second ceiling is the only explicit operating constraint.

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