photoshop_move_layer_up

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It accurately states what the tool does, but it does not mention edge cases like what happens if the active layer is already at the top of the stack, or whether the operation requires a prior document/layer selection. The core behavior is clear, but some behavioral context is missing.

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, well-formed sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and precisely scopes the result. Every word contributes meaning.

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 simple single-step operation with only one optional parameter and no output schema, the definition is nearly complete. It could mention the no-op scenario at the top of the layer stack, but that is a minor gap given the straightforward nature of the action.

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?

There is only one parameter and the schema description covers it fully, explaining that document_id optionally activates the document before running. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but none is needed given 100% schema coverage, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Move'), a specific resource ('active layer'), and an exact behavior ('up one position in the layer stack'). It is unambiguous and naturally distinguishes itself from sibling tools like move_layer_down, move_layer_to_top, and move_layer_to_bottom.

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?

Usage context is implied: use this when the agent needs to nudge the active layer up by one position. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over the related siblings (e.g., move_layer, move_layer_to_position, move_layer_to_top), leaving some routing decisions to inference.

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