Detach a linked audio or video clip in an Adobe Premiere timeline by specifying track type, track index, and clip index to edit the video or audio independently.
Unlink a clip from its linked audio/video
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 mutation but does not disclose whether the unlink is reversible, whether it affects both audio and video at once or one side, whether it requires the clip to be selected, or what happens if the clip isn't linked.
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 front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is perhaps too terse for a mutation tool, but it is appropriately sized and structured.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry more behavioral context for a mutation tool. The schema covers parameters well, but the description omits reversibility, prerequisites, and post-condition behavior, leaving an agent to guess.
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 the parameters (trackType, trackIndex, clipIndex) are already well documented with 0-based indexing and enum values. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, 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+resource: unlink a clip from its linked audio/video. It distinguishes the operation from the inverse sibling link_clips by name semantics. However, it doesn't clarify scope (e.g., whether this severs both audio and video link in one call).
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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (the clip must already be linked), and no reference to the sibling link_clips as an alternative. The usage is only implied by the verb.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.