premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Add Tracks

add_tracks

Add video, mono, stereo, or 5.1 audio tracks to the active Premiere Pro sequence, verify the requested counts were applied, and report when new tracks shift existing ones.

Instructions

Add video and/or audio tracks through QE, verify the active sequence gained the exact requested counts, and report explicitly when QE inserted the new tracks at index 0 and shifted every existing track up.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "add_tracks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`audio_tracks`	No	Number of standard stereo audio tracks to add (default: 0)
`video_tracks`	No	Number of video tracks to add (default: 0)
`audio_51_tracks`	No	Number of 5.1 audio tracks to add (default: 0)
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional client-chosen key (1-128 chars of A-Z a-z 0-9 . _ : -) for this intended edit. Pass a fresh key per edit and reuse it only when retrying that same edit, for example after a client-side timeout. A repeat with the same tool, key and arguments is not run again: while the first call is running it fails with IDEMPOTENCY_IN_PROGRESS (poll get_last_operations); after it finished it returns the original outcome marked replayed. A definite failure with nothing applied (receipt outcome not_applied) may be retried with the same key. Reusing a key with different arguments fails with IDEMPOTENCY_KEY_REUSED. Scoped to this MCP session (the stdio server process, or the HTTP server process when Streamable HTTP is stateless per request) and held in memory only (200 keys, 1 hour); it does not survive a restart or reconnect. Read-only invocations are never deduplicated.
`audio_mono_tracks`	No	Number of mono audio tracks to add (default: 0)
`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.

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.

First observedv1.30.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only tell the agent this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write; the description adds real behavioral knowledge beyond that — the tool verifies post-conditions against requested counts and explicitly reports index-0 insertion that shifts all existing tracks up. That shift is a non-obvious side effect for downstream index-based references, which is exactly the kind of disclosure that matters for a mutation. It does not discuss failure/partial-application behavior, which the idempotency schema partly covers.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that sequences action, verification, and reporting in execution order. It is dense but every clause (especially the index-0 shift warning) earns its place; it could be split for readability but wastes no words.

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 no output schema explanation needed, full param coverage, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the one thing the structured data cannot: the index-0 insertion side effect and count verification. It is slightly thin on backend behavior (QE vs the CEP/UXP guard surface in the schema) and on what happens when all counts default to zero.

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% and includes detailed per-parameter text (including the idempotency key contract), so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds only that the four track-count parameters are additive and collectively verified, without clarifying combination rules or what an all-zero call does.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Add video and/or audio tracks') plus the cardinality semantics ('exact requested counts'), which implicitly separates it from the singular sibling add_track. It never names a sibling explicitly, so differentiation is left partly to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternative (add_track, list_sequence_tracks, get_target_tracks are all plausible neighbors). The agent is told what happens after the call but not when to prefer this tool over its siblings.

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

Deploy Server