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

premiere-pro-mcp

by matt-j-penny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Validate Export Preset

validate_export_preset

Check that an Adobe Media Encoder .epr export preset exists and query the active Premiere sequence for the output file extension it will produce before configuring an export.

Instructions

Validate that an Adobe Media Encoder .epr preset exists and ask the active Premiere sequence which output extension it produces

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": {
      "preset_path": "<preset_path>"
    },
    "name": "validate_export_preset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
preset_pathYesFull path to an Adobe Media Encoder export preset (.epr)
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

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the annotations: it checks the .epr file's existence on disk and requires an active Premiere sequence to interrogate, both of which are preconditions an agent needs. However, it reads as a pure read/validate operation while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, and it never explains that discrepancy or mentions that idempotency keys apply. The annotations do cover the safety profile (destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower, but the read-only-looking wording versus a non-read-only hint is left unexplained.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the primary action (validate preset existence) comes first and the secondary effect (query the sequence's extension) follows. Nothing in it is redundant with the name or title, which merely restate 'Validate Export Preset' as given.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and all four parameters are fully documented in the schema. What is missing is content proportional to the tool's complexity: the nested expected_cep_target/expected_project_path guards go undiscussed, and the dual validate-and-query nature is never reconciled with a non-read-only annotation. Adequate for a one-file check, but thin for a tool with this much guard machinery.

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 schema already carries preset_path, expected_cep_target, expected_project_path and idempotency_key semantics; the baseline is 3. The description does add a little meaning by implying that the active sequence (the sequence_id guard) is queried for its output extension and that the preset is a real file on disk. It adds nothing about the expected_cep_target guard or idempotency behavior that the agent would not already get from the schema.

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 ('Validate that an Adobe Media Encoder .epr preset exists') and adds a second, concrete behavior ('ask the active Premiere sequence which output extension it produces'). An agent can tell it is a pre-flight existence/extension check rather than an export. It loses a point because it never differentiates itself from close siblings such as get_export_file_extension or validate_project_for_export, which overlap with the second half of the stated behavior.

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 explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing language anywhere in the description; it only describes what the tool does. An agent must infer that this is a pre-export check and must guess whether get_export_file_extension or validate_project_for_export should run instead or as well. With so many validation/export siblings, the absence of any routing guidance is a real gap.

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