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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Set Transcode On Ingest

set_transcode_on_ingest

Enable or disable project transcoding on ingest to control how Premiere imports media; the request is reported as requested_unverified because Premiere exposes no getter.

Instructions

Request enabling or disabling project transcoding on ingest. Premiere exposes no getter for independent verification, so dispatch is reported as requested_unverified.

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": {
      "enabled": "<enabled>"
    },
    "name": "set_transcode_on_ingest"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
enabledYesTrue to enable transcode on ingest, false to disable
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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations: Premiere exposes no getter, so the outcome is reported as 'requested_unverified' rather than confirmed. That is valuable because annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. However, it does not say whether the change is reversible, whether it applies retroactively to existing media, or what happens if no project is open, which leaves gaps for a mutating tool.

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 sentences, no filler, with the action front-loaded and the verification caveat second. Every clause carries information the agent needs, and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 simple boolean mutation with a fully documented schema and an available output schema, the description covers the critical unknown: that the result cannot be verified. With output_schema present, return-value detail is not required. It falls short of 5 only because it omits the surrounding operational preconditions that a 'request'-style dispatch implies.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the boolean 'enabled', the idempotency_key retry contract, and the nested expected_cep_target guard are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, and by the rubric's baseline rule, a 3 is correct here. It does not compensate for anything, because nothing is missing.

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 resource: 'Request enabling or disabling project transcoding on ingest.' This is unambiguous and distinct from siblings such as set_offline or set_footage_interpretation, all of which govern other project properties. Nothing is said about siblings or overlapping settings, but the resource name is specific enough to stand on its own.

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 or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisite such as an open or saved project, and no mention of alternatives. The word 'Request' hints at a fire-and-forget dispatch pattern, but the agent must infer that. Usage context is implicit at best.

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