Runs a Photoshop menu command by its stringID through app.runMenuItem, enabling MCP clients to trigger actions like flattenImage, copyMerged, or toggleRulers without manual UI navigation.
Photoshop: run a menu item by its stringID (e.g. "flattenImage", "newPlacedLayer", "copyMerged", "selectAllLayers", "toggleRulers") via app.runMenuItem.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| command | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description lists 'flattenImage' as an example, which is a destructive Photoshop operation, while annotations declare destructiveHint=false. This is a direct conflict between the described capability and the structured safety annotation.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with useful examples. Every part contributes to identifying the operation and the required argument format.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate to attempt a call with an example stringID, but it omits how to discover all valid menu command IDs and does not clarify side effects or return behavior.
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 parameter meaning. It adds useful examples of valid stringIDs, but it does not explain exact matching, case sensitivity, where to find the full list of valid commands, or error behavior for invalid IDs.
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 and resource: run a Photoshop menu item by its stringID via app.runMenuItem. The examples make the purpose concrete, but it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings such as ps_runAction or ai_executeMenuCommand.
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 implied by 'run a menu item by its stringID' and the supplied examples, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.