Enable or disable an individual clip on a Premiere Pro timeline to control whether it plays, using track type, track index, and clip index.
Enable or disable a clip
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| enabled | Yes | ||
| clipIndex | Yes | Clip index on the track, 0-based from the left (see get_timeline_clips) | |
| trackType | Yes | Track type | |
| trackIndex | Yes | Track index, 0-based (V1 = 0, A1 = 0) |
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 reversible state mutation but does not say whether enabled=true means 'active/audible' or its inverse, whether it applies to audio and video alike, or what happens if indices are out of range.
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?
A single six-word sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no padding. It is efficient, though efficiency here comes at the cost of needed detail.
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?
A 4-required-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema needs the description to explain polarity of 'enabled', applicability to audio vs video, and error behavior. None of that is present, leaving an agent to guess at the core semantic.
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 75%: clipIndex, trackType, and trackIndex are documented in the schema, and only the boolean 'enabled' lacks a description (though its meaning is not self-evident given the missing on/off semantics). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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+resource: 'Enable or disable a clip'. An agent can tell what the tool acts on, but the description never distinguishes it from the sibling set_clip_mute, which plausibly affects the same audible/visible state — the key disambiguation is missing.
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 guidance on when to use this versus set_clip_mute or set_clip_volume, and no stated preconditions such as needing the clip's track and index (which must be resolved via get_timeline_clips). The agent must infer all routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.