ps_openFile

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-open-world behavior, lowering the bar. The description adds no context about what happens when the document is already open, whether multiple paths open multiple documents, or any UI side effects, so it contributes little beyond the annotations.

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 the platform, action, and supported file types, plus the one non-obvious parameter in parentheses. No wasted words.

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 two parameters, an agent still lacks the return value (document handle/ID), the multi-path behavior, and how to reference the opened document in follow-up calls (ps_getState, ps_saveDocument). Adequate but with clear gaps for a foundational entry point.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load; it does explain that asSmartObject means 'opens as smart object', which is genuine added meaning over a bare boolean. However, 'paths' (an array) is not described at all — no indication of absolute vs relative paths, single vs multiple, or ordering.

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 ('open') and resource ('image/PSD/PDF/RAW files') scoped to Photoshop, and clarifies the asSmartObject variant. It does not distinguish itself from near-neighbors like ps_placeFile or adobe_openFile, so an agent must infer the difference.

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 is only implied by the name and file-type list; there is no explicit statement of when to open versus place (ps_placeFile) or which of the several openFile tools to pick. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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