premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Set Scratch Disk Path

set_scratch_disk_path

Sets one Premiere Pro scratch disk for captured media, previews, auto-save, CC Libraries, or motion graphics templates to an existing folder or the project location, with optional save-and-verify.

Instructions

Set one project scratch disk (captured media, previews, auto-save, CC Libraries or Motion Graphics template media) to an existing folder or "SameAsProject", using Premiere's ScratchDiskType constants.

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": {
      "scratch_disk_type": "<scratch_disk_type>",
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "set_scratch_disk_path"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Absolute path of an existing folder, or "SameAsProject"
`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.
`save_and_verify`	No	Save the project afterwards and confirm the saved scratch-disk settings (default: false). Premiere has no scratch-disk getter, so without this the result is unverified.
`scratch_disk_type`	Yes	Which scratch disk to set
`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

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered; the description adds the useful precondition that the target folder must exist (or be the literal "SameAsProject"). It omits behavior the agent would care about — notably that the result is unverified unless save_and_verify is set, and how the idempotency key interacts with retries — though both are spelled out in the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and scope first and the parenthetical category gloss second; nothing is padded. The only mild cost is that the parenthetical is dense and still doesn't fully explain the enum values it names.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with six parameters (including the complex expected_cep_target guard), a high-coverage schema, and an output schema, the description covers the core action but leaves the agent without routing guidance against the very similar sibling and without any nudge toward save_and_verify for verification. Adequate, but it leaves real gaps for a mutation tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does add a little meaning by glossing the scratch-disk categories in human terms (captured media, previews, auto-save, CC Libraries, Motion Graphics template media) and by reinforcing the "existing folder or SameAsProject" semantics of path, but it adds no syntax or mapping detail beyond that.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Set one project scratch disk") and enumerates the five media categories the setting covers, so the agent knows exactly what is being mutated. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling set_project_scratch_disk — the word "one" hints at single-vs-multiple scope but never says so explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance: no mention of when to prefer set_project_scratch_disk, when to read current values with get_project_scratch_disks first, or when save_and_verify should be turned on. The only embedded constraint is the prerequisite that the folder must already exist, which is a precondition rather than usage routing.

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

Deploy Server