photoshop_list_documents

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

With no annotations to convey safety or side effects, the description carries the full burden and succeeds admirably. It states preconditions ('safe when zero documents open') and side effects ('briefly activates each tab to read artboard_count, then restores the original active document'), which is exactly the kind of behavioral disclosure an agent needs.

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 information-dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, conditions, return shape, preconditions, and side effects are all covered in compact sections. No filler or repetition is present.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description provides a full return shape including the documents array, active_document_id, and context. Combined with explicit usage guidance, alternatives, preconditions, and side effects, nothing an agent needs to call this tool correctly is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is an empty object, so there is no parameter meaning to clarify. Per the baseline for 0-param tools, this is rated 4; the description appropriately omits parameter details since none exist.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List every open Photoshop document', and enumerates the exact fields returned. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining that callers need document_id before switching, previewing, or closing a file.

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?

The description provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do NOT use when' guidance, naming alternative tools (photoshop_get_document_info, photoshop_get_state) for the active-document case. This leaves no ambiguity about when this tool is the right choice.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.