Retrieves project panel metadata columns for a given item node, including codec, duration, description, and log notes. Use it to inspect item details before editing in Premiere Pro.
Project panel metadata columns of an item (codec, duration, description, log note...)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nodeId | Yes | Project item nodeId |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read but never states read-only behavior, permission/state requirements, or the return format (e.g., list of column names vs values). Examples of columns are the only behavioral hint.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One short fragment, front-loaded and without filler. However, the trailing ellipsis makes it feel under-specified rather than deliberately concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description should clarify the return shape. It lists example column names but does not say whether it returns column definitions or values for the given item, leaving a material gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single nodeId parameter is fully described as 'Project item nodeId'. The description adds only 'of an item', so baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (get) and resource (project panel metadata columns) plus example fields, so an agent knows it fetches item metadata columns. It does not explicitly distinguish from get_project_item_info or get_xmp_metadata.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are named. The required nodeId and 'of an item' imply you call it for a specific project item, but nothing tells the agent when to prefer it over get_project_item_info.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.