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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Plan Short Export Folder

plan_short_export_folder
Read-onlyIdempotent

Plans a series-named export folder inside an approved Shorts root and returns a reminder to create it when missing; no files are written or Premiere changes made.

Instructions

Plan a series-named export folder inside an approved Shorts root and remind the caller to create it when missing. Local-only; never writes files or changes Premiere.

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": {
      "export_root": "<export_root>",
      "series_name": "<series_name>",
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "plan_short_export_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
brandNoChannel brand kit. cafe must not reuse watch_club fonts, name cards, or speaker colors.
titleYesShort title used as the file stem.
extensionNoFile extension without a dot; defaults to mp4.
export_rootYesAbsolute Shorts export root, for example the ALL Shorts or Cafe Exports folder.
series_nameYesAnime or series folder name to create under export_root when missing.
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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context: it is local-only, never writes files or changes Premiere, and only reminds the caller to create the folder when missing. It does not add details about permissions, rate limits, or output structure, but the output schema likely covers return values.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loads the core action and scope, and includes the critical non-mutating constraint without unnecessary detail. Every sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool.

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?

Given the full schema coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description provides enough high-level context for the agent to understand the tool’s purpose, behavior, and non-mutating nature. It does not mention the optional CEP/project-path validation guards, but those are fully documented in the schema.

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 seven parameters and their nested structures. The description reinforces the series-name and export-root concepts but does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters such as brand, title, extension, expected_cep_target, or expected_project_path.

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: planning a series-named export folder inside an approved Shorts root, with a reminder to create it when missing. It clearly distinguishes this from file-writing or Premiere-changing tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 description gives clear usage context by stating the tool is local-only and never writes files or changes Premiere, which helps an agent choose it when a non-mutating folder-planning step is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of the top score.

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