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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Remove Keyframe Range

remove_keyframe_range
Destructive

Deletes all keyframes within an inclusive time range from an effect property and returns the remaining keys; leaves the property unchanged if the range has none.

Instructions

Remove every keyframe in a time range (inclusive) from an effect property and read the remaining keys back. Refuses, changing nothing, when the range holds no key.

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": {
      "node_id": "<node_id>",
      "effect_name": "<effect_name>",
      "property_name": "<property_name>",
      "start_seconds": "<start_seconds>",
      "end_seconds": "<end_seconds>"
    },
    "name": "remove_keyframe_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_idYesNode ID of the clip
effect_nameYesDisplay name of the effect
end_secondsYesEnd of the range, in seconds from the clip's start; must not be before start_seconds
property_nameYesDisplay name of the property
start_secondsYesStart of the range: seconds from the clip's start on the timeline (0 is the clip's first frame)
property_indexNoOptional property index from get_effect_properties; required when property_name is duplicated.
idempotency_keyNoOptional 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_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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing atomic no-op refusal on an empty range and the read-back of remaining keys. It says nothing about undo/restore behavior or how the supplied idempotency_key interacts with the declared non-idempotent hint, so the behavioral picture is useful but incomplete for a destructive mutation.

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, with the core action and scope front-loaded and the exception clause second. No filler or restatement of the title beyond what is needed.

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?

For a destructive 9-parameter tool with nested guard objects and an output schema, the description covers the action, the range semantics, the failure mode, and the returned data. Remaining details (tick-identity guards, idempotency contract) are fully documented in the schema, so the description is complete enough without duplicating them.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema baseline carries parameter meaning. The description still contributes the non-obvious detail that the range is inclusive, which the schema does not state for end_seconds, and frames start/end as a single range unit rather than two independent values.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Remove every keyframe in a time range (inclusive) from an effect property'. The qualifier 'every... in a time range' implicitly separates it from the single-key remove_keyframe sibling, but that sibling is never named, so the differentiation 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear operating condition ('Refuses, changing nothing, when the range holds no key') that tells the agent what happens on an empty selection, and the scope wording signals bulk-in-range usage. It stops short of naming alternatives such as remove_keyframe for single-key deletion or stating when a range removal should be preferred.

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