Retrieves the active Photoshop document's name, size, mode, layer summary, and selection so agents can verify state before and after edits without generating previews.
Active document state: name, size, mode, layers summary, selection. Cheap — call it before and after edits instead of previews.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that the call is inexpensive and positioned as a pre/post-edit check, but it does not explicitly state read-only safety, side effects, or behavior when no active document exists.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core resource and returned fields, followed by practical usage guidance. Every phrase contributes useful information without waste.
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 output schema and no parameters, the description lists the key fields an agent should expect. It is nearly complete for a simple state getter, though it could clarify active-document prerequisites and sibling distinctions.
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 takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter detail.
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 resource and lists the state fields returned: name, size, mode, layers summary, selection. It contrasts with previews, but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling state/info tools such as photoshop_get_state or photoshop_get_document_info.
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?
It gives clear usage guidance: call before and after edits instead of previews. This names an alternative category and a workflow context, but does not specify when not to use it or name the exact alternative tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.