Move a clip left or right on a Premiere Pro timeline while automatically trimming its neighbours to compensate, keeping adjacent edits intact.
Slide: move a clip left/right while its neighbours are trimmed to compensate
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| offset | Yes | Seconds (negative = earlier) | |
| 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key mutation: the clip moves and adjacent clips are trimmed. However, it omits permissions, reversibility, boundary behavior at track edges, and what happens if neighbours cannot be trimmed.
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?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. Every clause contributes to explaining the operation.
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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the core timeline effect is explained, but the description lacks prerequisites, edge-case behavior, and return expectations. The rich schema compensates for parameter documentation but not for operational context.
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 description coverage is 100%, so parameter meanings are already well covered, including that offset is in seconds and negative means earlier. The description adds only the general 'left/right' direction and no parameter-level detail beyond the schema.
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?
The description gives a specific verb ('slide') and resource ('clip') and explains the distinctive effect: moving the clip while trimming neighbours to compensate. This distinguishes it from plain move_clip or trim_clip, though it does not name those siblings explicitly.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. The operation described implies a timeline-editing context, but the agent is not told when sliding is preferable to moving, trimming, or slipping a clip.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.