premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Set Clip Scale

set_clip_scale

Scales a clip evenly via its Motion effect and reads back the result; with Uniform Scale off, it sets both Scale and Scale Width so the picture is not stretched.

Instructions

Scale a video clip evenly through its Motion effect using English or measured Spanish built-in names, and read the result back. With Uniform Scale off, both Scale (height) and Scale Width are set, so the picture is not stretched; use set_scale_width_height for different values.

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>",
      "scale": "<scale>"
    },
    "name": "set_clip_scale"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scale`	Yes	Scale value (100 = original size, 200 = 2x, 50 = half)
`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

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare it is a non-destructive, non-read-only write; the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the change is routed through the Motion effect, it writes BOTH Scale and Scale Width when Uniform Scale is off (preventing stretching), and the result is read back. It does not discuss the idempotency_key dedup behavior, though the schema covers that 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences: the core action and its even-scaling caveat come first, then the sibling alternative. No filler or restated title.

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?

The tool is moderately complex (5 params, nested identity guard, output schema present), and the description covers the operation's effect target and its key side effect. Return values need not be explained given the output schema, though a note on locale-dependent name resolution would complete the picture.

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 coverage is 100% and every parameter, including the nested expected_cep_target, already has rich inline documentation; the description contributes no additional per-parameter detail (e.g. valid scale ranges or what 'measured Spanish built-in names' means for the effect parameter). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Scale a video clip evenly through its Motion effect') and immediately contrasts it with set_scale_width_height, so an agent can distinguish it from the sizing siblings without opening the schema.

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?

It gives a clear selection rule: use this tool for even scaling with Uniform Scale off, and use set_scale_width_height when height and width should differ. It does not address the other scale-related siblings (e.g. set_uniform_scale, set_scale_to_frame_size), so the routing is good but not exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server