premiere-pro-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Start Batch Encode

start_batch_encode

Starts Adobe Media Encoder's render queue for a batch export and confirms only that the handoff was accepted, not queue progress or output files.

Instructions

Request Adobe Media Encoder to start the render queue; reports only accepted handoff, not queue progress or output-file creation.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "start_batch_encode"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations: the call is a fire-and-forget handoff, so a success response does not mean the render finished or produced a file. That is exactly the kind of async caveat annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) cannot express. It stops short of stating permission/authorization needs or how an in-flight or failed handoff surfaces to the caller.

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?

A single semicolon-joined sentence with the affirmative action front-loaded and the limitation second. Every clause carries information; nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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 zero-required-parameter trigger with an output schema, the description covers the essential caveat about what the response does and does not guarantee. However, it leaves out the relationship to the queue-population and per-file encode siblings and says nothing about how to poll for progress (the schema mentions get_last_operations only inside the idempotency help), so an agent still lacks the full operating picture for this mutating trigger.

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% across all three parameters (including the long idempotency_key and expected_cep_target guard documentation), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about any parameter — notably it never hints that an idempotency key or CEP identity guard is available for this non-idempotent call — so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Request Adobe Media Encoder to start the render queue" gives a specific verb (start) and a specific resource (AME's render queue), and the trailing clause bounds what the call actually accomplishes. It is not differentiated by name from near-siblings like encode_file, encode_project_item, or export_sequence_job_start, so an agent must still infer the boundary, but the core action is unmistakable.

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 only implied: you call it to kick off an already-populated AME render queue. There is no explicit statement about prerequisites (must the queue be populated first, e.g. via add_to_render_queue?) and no guidance on when to prefer encode_file or encode_project_item instead. The "reports only accepted handoff" clause functions as a partial when-not hint, but no alternatives are named.

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

Deploy Server