Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
premiere-pro-mcp

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Inspect Edit Readiness

inspect_edit_readiness
Read-onlyIdempotent

Audit the active sequence for empty timelines, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, and excessive Motion scale before editing.

Instructions

Audit the active sequence in one read-only bridge request for empty timelines, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, and excessive Motion scale. Structural diagnostics only; it cannot judge story, framing, sound, or final delivery.

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": "inspect_edit_readiness"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expected_cep_targetNoOptional reviewed CEP sequence/clip identity and exact tick ranges. Checked before every generated command; UXP refuses this CEP-only guard.
primary_video_trackNoVideo track used for gap inspection (default: 0)
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.
gap_tolerance_secondsNoIgnore smaller gaps caused by time rounding (default: 0.001)
maximum_scale_percentNoWarn above this Motion scale percentage (default: 110)

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. First observedv1.30.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds value by disclosing that the entire audit runs in a single bridge request (round-trip cost) and by enumerating the concrete failure classes it reports. It does not mention that the optional CEP identity guard can cause a refusal, which matters behaviorally, though the schema documents that at length.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and the audit scope, then the limitation. No filler and nothing that repeats the schema verbatim.

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, the description only needs to convey scope and limits, and the enumeration of five diagnostic categories plus the structural-only caveat does that. The one gap is the absence of any signal that it operates on the active sequence with no required inputs and can decline on identity mismatch.

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 is 3 and the schema already explains primary_video_track, gap_tolerance_seconds, maximum_scale_percent, and the expected_cep_target guard. The description only implicitly maps its checks to those knobs ('primary-track gaps', 'excessive Motion scale') without adding thresholds, defaults, or units.

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 (audit) and resource (the active sequence) and enumerates the exact checks: empty timelines, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, excessive Motion scale. It does not name or contrast with the closest sibling, audit_timeline_health (nor get_timeline_gaps / inspect_sequence_review_report), so the boundary between this and other audit tools is left 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 Guidelines3/5

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

The negative scoping ('structural diagnostics only; cannot judge story, framing, sound, or final delivery') tells an agent when the results stop being trustworthy, which is useful. But there is no explicit guidance on when to call this instead of audit_timeline_health, get_timeline_gaps, or validate_project_for_export, nor any stated prerequisites (e.g. an active sequence must exist).

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