premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Set Clip Position

set_clip_position

Sets a video clip's Motion effect Position (X/Y) using pixels or normalized 0-1 fractions and reads it back; accepts built-in English or measured Spanish parameter names.

Instructions

Set the Position property on a video clip's Motion effect using English or measured Spanish built-in names, then read it back. Values default to pixels; explicit normalized values are fractions from 0 to 1. Omitted units with a 0–1 pair keeps pixels and adds a warning.

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>",
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "set_clip_position"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`x`	Yes	X position in the selected units: sequence pixels by default, or normalized 0–1 fractions.
`y`	Yes	Y position in the selected units: sequence pixels by default, or normalized 0–1 fractions.
`units`	No	Coordinate units; defaults to pixels for compatibility. normalized means 0–1 fractions of the sequence frame for Position or source frame for Anchor Point.
`node_id`	Yes	Node ID of the clip
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional 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_target`	No	Optional reviewed CEP sequence/clip identity and exact tick ranges. Checked before every generated command; UXP refuses this CEP-only guard.
`expected_project_path`	No	Optional 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

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully.
`data`	No	Tool-specific result data when ok is true; on failure, diagnostic detail when the tool provides it.
`tool`	Yes	The registered MCP tool name.
`error`	No	Failure detail when ok is false.
`receipt`	No	Versioned common mutation receipt; success never implies rendered verification.
`idempotency`	No	Present 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.

First observedv1.30.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only say this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds real behavioral context the annotations lack: the position is read back after writing, and an ambiguous 0–1 pair without units silently stays in pixels and appends a warning — a subtle, high-value disclosure. It omits idempotency/replay semantics, but the schema carries those in detail.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the unit rules. No filler, though the 'English or measured Spanish built-in names' clause is cryptic and costs a moment of interpretation.

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 7-parameter mutation with nested guard objects and an output schema, the description covers the operational core (what is set, unit semantics, read-back verification) and can leave return shape to the output schema. It does not mention failure modes or the missing-Motion-effect case, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

With 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description earns an extra point by explaining the warning behavior for unit-less 0–1 pairs, which the schema does not state. The phrase about 'English or measured Spanish built-in names' is unclear about which parameter it governs, tempering the score.

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 names a specific verb and target: set the Position property on a clip's Motion effect, then read it back. That is far more precise than a sibling like set_clip_properties, and 'Motion effect' scopes it away from anchor point/scale/rotation. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use for related operations, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 operation itself (positioning a clip), and the unit-handling rules tell the agent how to call it, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative guidance, nor any stated prerequisites such as requiring an existing Motion effect on the clip.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server