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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Inspect Sequence Review Report

inspect_sequence_review_report
Read-onlyIdempotent

Build a read-only sequence review report summarizing timeline structure, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, marker timing, and offline-source evidence for handoff checks.

Instructions

Build one read-only sequence handoff report with timeline structure, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, marker timing, and offline-source evidence. Media paths are never returned; marker comments require an explicit opt-in. It does not prove rendered pixels, audio quality, caption correctness, rights, or editorial approval.

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_sequence_review_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_markersNoMaximum marker entries to return from the start of the sequence (default: 50, maximum: 200).
sequence_idNoSequence name or ID. Uses the active sequence if omitted.
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.
include_marker_commentsNoInclude marker comments. Defaults to false because comments can contain private editorial notes.

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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts on top: media paths are never returned, marker comments are suppressed by default because they can contain private editorial notes, and the report makes no claim about rendered output or approval status. These are non-obvious privacy and evidentiary guarantees an agent could not derive from the schema or annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what gets built and what it contains, then the privacy constraint, then the negative guarantees. Every clause carries information; there is no filler or restatement.

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?

With annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema covering return shape, the description's remaining burden is scope and trust boundary, which it handles thoroughly: a full contents list plus an explicit list of what the report does not certify. An agent knows whether to reach for it and what it may conclude from the result.

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 all six parameters including max_markers defaults and the CEP guard semantics, which sets the baseline at 3. The description corroborates a few of them — primary-track gap inspection and the opt-in nature of marker comments — but adds no format, default, or interaction detail beyond what the schema states.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("Build one read-only sequence handoff report") and enumerates exactly what the report contains: timeline structure, primary-track gaps, disabled clips, muted tracks, marker timing, offline-source evidence. That is far more than a restatement of the name, but it never distinguishes this from nearby siblings such as get_full_sequence_info, get_timeline_summary, or audit_timeline_health, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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 closing sentence gives explicit scope exclusions — it does not prove rendered pixels, audio quality, caption correctness, rights, or editorial approval — which tells the agent when this report is not sufficient evidence. It also states that marker comments need an explicit opt-in, implying a privacy-driven decision point. However, no alternative tool is ever named for the cases this report does not cover.

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