Add a new layer to an InDesign document, specifying name, color, lock state, and visibility for organized layout management.
Create a new layer
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Layer name | |
| color | No | Layer color for guides | |
| locked | No | Layer locked state | |
| visible | No | Layer visibility |
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 must disclose behavior, but it only states the core action. It does not mention whether the new layer becomes active, what return value is produced, or any side effects.
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 filler or redundant detail. 'New' is slightly redundant with 'create,' but overall it is efficiently sized.
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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not specify whether the layer is created in the active document, whether it becomes active, or what the return value is. Given the four parameters and sibling context, a bit more context is needed.
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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters (name, color, locked, visible). Since the schema already documents parameters thoroughly, the baseline 3 applies; the description adds no extra parameter semantics.
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 clearly states the action ('Create') and resource ('layer'), identifying the tool's function among many create_* siblings. However, it offers no additional scoping or differentiation from layer-related operations like set_active_layer, so it stops short of a 5.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or references to sibling tools; the usage is only implied by the verb 'create'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.