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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Set Blend Mode

set_blend_mode

Set a video clip's blend mode through its Opacity effect and read back the stored mode to control how clips composite in Premiere Pro.

Instructions

Set a video clip's blend mode through its Opacity effect and read the stored mode back. Premiere stores the mode as an index into its modes in alphabetical order, with Subtract and Divide last (mapped on Premiere 25.2.3 by rendering every index over a known background).

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>",
      "blend_mode": "<blend_mode>"
    },
    "name": "set_blend_mode"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_idYesNode ID of the video clip
blend_modeYesBlend mode name
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
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare it is a non-destructive write (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), leaving the burden largely on the description. The text adds substantive host-specific behavior: Premiere stores the mode as an alphabetical index with Subtract and Divide appended last, and the mapping was established empirically on 25.2.3. That is real information beyond the annotations, though it never says what happens if the Opacity effect is absent or whether the value round-trips identically.

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 front-loaded sentences: the operation comes first, the storage-index caveat second. Nothing is redundant with the title or schema. The second sentence is long and reads as implementation trivia, but it justifies itself as troubleshooting context for unexpected stored values.

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?

For a five-parameter mutation with nested verification guards and a declared output schema, the description covers the action and the one genuinely surprising behavior (index-based storage). Return values need not be explained because an output schema exists, and the idempotency and CEP-target guards are exhaustively documented in the schema itself.

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 baseline is 3. The description earns a bump because it explains how the blend_mode string is translated into an internal index and why the two extra modes sit outside alphabetical order, which the flat enum in the schema does not convey. It says nothing extra about node_id, idempotency_key, expected_cep_target, or expected_project_path, but those are fully documented in the schema.

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 (set) and resource (a video clip's blend mode), plus the mechanism by which it happens (the clip's Opacity effect) and that the stored value is read back. An agent can tell this is a blend-mode mutation rather than an opacity or property-setter tool. It stops short of distinguishing itself from the sibling 'set_frame_blend', which is not clarified.

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?

Usage is implied by the mechanism: the tool goes 'through its Opacity effect', which hints the clip must expose that effect, but no explicit precondition or failure mode is given. There is no statement of when to prefer this over alternatives such as set_frame_blend or set_clip_opacity, leaving routing to inference.

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