premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Copy Effects Between Clips

copy_effects_between_clips

Copies effects, parameter values, and keyframes from one clip to another, updating existing effects instead of stacking duplicates and skipping intrinsic Motion/Opacity unless named.

Instructions

Copy all effects (or a specific effect) from one clip to another, including parameter values and keyframes, and read every written value back. A missing effect is added through the experimental legacy QE DOM; when the target already has that effect, its values are updated instead of stacking a second default-valued instance. Intrinsic components such as Motion and Opacity are skipped unless named. Uses the same component matching and per-property receipts as paste_clip_attributes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "source_node_id": "<source_node_id>",
      "target_node_id": "<target_node_id>"
    },
    "name": "copy_effects_between_clips"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`effect_name`	No	Specific effect display name to copy (copies all non-intrinsic effects if omitted)
`source_node_id`	Yes	Node ID of the source clip to copy effects from
`target_node_id`	Yes	Node ID of the target clip to paste effects to
`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.
`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

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the sparse annotations: it discloses the experimental legacy QE DOM path used to add missing effects, states that an existing effect is updated rather than duplicated with default values, notes intrinsic components are skipped unless named, and promises read-back of every written value. Missing: failure behavior when the source lacks the effect or when QE DOM is unavailable, and whether the operation is atomic across multiple effects.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and payload in the first sentence, then layered with the fallback path and the non-stacking rule. Four dense sentences with little waste, though the paste_clip_attributes cross-reference is slightly compressed and the read-back clause could be folded in more cleanly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutating copy tool with nested guard parameters and an output schema, the description covers what is copied, how missing effects are created, how duplicates are handled, what is excluded, and that receipts are verified. Return values are covered by the output schema, so no additional return documentation is needed here.

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 explains source_node_id, target_node_id, idempotency_key, and the guard object. The description only adds marginal semantics on effect_name (specific effect vs. all, intrinsic exclusion) and says nothing about the identity-guard or idempotency parameters beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 is right.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Copy all effects (or a specific effect) from one clip to another') plus concrete payload ('parameter values and keyframes'). It also scopes the behavior against near-neighbors by clarifying intrinsics are skipped and by tying its matching semantics to paste_clip_attributes.

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?

The description implies when the tool applies (omitting effect_name copies all non-intrinsic effects; naming one limits the copy), which is useful operand guidance. However, it never explicitly routes the agent between this tool, copy_effect_values, and paste_clip_attributes — the latter is only invoked as a shared-semantics reference, not as an alternative to choose instead.

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

Deploy Server