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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List Markers

list_markers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists markers on the active sequence or a source project item, including GUID and color, and returns a clean error for timeline-clip node IDs.

Instructions

List markers on the active sequence, or on a source project item that exposes a marker collection, including marker GUID and color when readable. A timeline-clip node_id returns a clean error instead of a raw TypeError.

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": "list_markers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_idNoOptional clip node ID to list clip markers instead of sequence markers
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. First observedv1.30.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: marker GUID and color are included only 'when readable' (a partial-result caveat) and invalid clip node_ids yield a clean error rather than an exception. That partial-result and failure-mode context is exactly what annotations cannot express.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary scope, then the fallback scope, then the failure caveat. The middle clause ('or on a source project item that exposes a marker collection') is slightly dense but carries real qualification, and 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and the deep expected_cep_target guard is fully described in the schema. What remains thin is disambiguation from the many marker-related siblings, which the description leaves to inference for a 3-parameter, nested-object tool.

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 all three parameters are documented in the schema, including node_id's clip-vs-sequence semantics and the guard options. The description restates the node_id behavior and adds only the error outcome, so it does not meaningfully exceed the schema baseline.

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 ('List markers') plus the two scopes it covers: the active sequence or a source project item. It also previews the returned fields (GUID, color). It does not name or distinguish itself from close siblings such as get_clip_markers, get_sequence_markers_by_type, or export_review_markers, so an agent must infer the division of labor.

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?

It establishes a default (active sequence) and an alternate scope (source project item), and warns that a timeline-clip node_id produces a clean error rather than a raw TypeError. However, it never points to the sibling tools an agent should pick instead when it wants clip markers or type-filtered markers, so the routing guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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